iiiiiiiiii  III 


!''tiiiir!iiiiNii!iiii 
iitiiiniiiliiillllllililllilllll  || 


■■ 


11 

iiiiiiiiiiii 


11 


ill 
II 


-.* 


N<> 


LIBRARY 

OF   THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 

Class 


n'l 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2007  with  funding  from 

Microsoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/examinationofsocOOwallrich 


AN  EXAMINATION 
OF  SOCIETY 


FROM  THE  STANDPOINT  of  EVOLUTION 


By 

Louis  Wallis 


CoIumbuSt  Ohio : 

Xihc  Br0us  press 


COPYRIGHT  1901 


By  LOUIS  WALLIS, 

Foreign  Rights  Assigned. 


^0  fatber  an&  fiDotber 

THIS  BOOK 
IS  LOVINGLY  INSCRIBED 


PREFACE. 


THE  general  thesis  of  this  book  was  first  published 
in  a  prospectus  distributed  in  April,  1901.  The  pro- 
spectus is  necessarily  a  mere  sketch,  omitting  all 
development  of  details.  A  brief,  but  more  satisfactory, 
presentation  was  made  in  the  American  Journal  of  Soci- 
ology, for  May,  1902,  in  a  paper  entitled  "The  Capitali- 
zation of  Social  Development."  That  paper  is  a  condensa- 
tion of  the  work  now  published. 

The  book  attempts  to  bring  the  doctrine  of  social  evo- 
lution more  definitely  into  relation  with  facts  established 
by  the  newer  treatment  of  history  and  life.  The  nine- 
teenth century  accumulated  a  greater  mass  of  knowledge 
about  human  society  than  had  been  possessed  in  any  pre- 
vious age.  Scientific  research  flung  out  into  bold  relief 
the  fact  that  present-day  civilization  is  the  outcome  of  an 
unfinished  growth-process  which  began  on  the  levels  of 
animality  long  before  the  times  of  written  history.  The 
remains  of  prehistoric  ages,  buried  in  ascending  order 
in  the  soil  of  the  continents,  were  extensively  studied, 
with  impressively  uniform  results  wherever  the  investi- 
gation was  carried.  The  sources  of  history,  from  ancient 
to  modern  times,  were  critically  sifted.  Altogether, 
through  the  labors  of  an  army  of  inquirers,  an  immense 
mass  of  material  has  been  accumulated,  not  only  in  im- 
mediate connection  with  the  study  of  history  and  pre- 
historic archaeology,  but  along  with  the  pursuit  of  in- 
vestigations into  the  customs,  manners,  and  arts  of  the 
lower  races,  the  facts  of  human  and  animal  psychology, 
and  the  action  of  the  earth's  physical  forces.  This  ma- 
terial, however,  is  largely  undigested.  It  affords  a  promis- 
ing field  for  the  inductive  organization  of  knowledge  about 


\ 


6  PREFACE. 

society;  but  in  large  part  tlie  field  lies  fallow.  To  be 
more  specific,  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  as  applied  to 
human  society,  has  thus  far  given  us  a  gross  map  of  a 
territory,  a  standpoint  from  which  to  approach^  the  sub- 
ject; but  it  has  not  opened  up  sufifiiciently  concrete  views 
of  social  phenomena,  nor  given  us  a  practical  and  in- 
timate idea  of  the  facts.  Dazzled  by  the  achievements  of 
evolutionary  science,  we  are  prone  to  think  the  whole 
story  has  been  told.  The  great  fact  of  development  having 
been  brought  into  relief,  we  have  tended  to  accept  the  fact 
without  pausing  to  ask  what  have  been  the  actual  condi- 
tions under  which  this  vast  upward  movement  of  hu- 
manity has  taken  place.  This  book,  as  already  suggested, 
is  published  in  the  belief  that  materials  now  at  the  dis- 
posal of  sociological  investigators  lend  themselves  to  a 
more  positive  treatment  than  they  have  yet  received. 

In  attempting  to  give  a  more  definite  and  concrete 
form  to  the  doctrine  of  social  evolution,  the  present  work 
lays  down  a  proposition  whereof  the  validity  is  to  be 
tested,  not  by  prejudice,  but  by  the  logical  methods  of 
science.  We  are  not  entirely  sure  about  the  value  of  our 
thesis.  No  new  facts  are  brought  forward;  but  an  at- 
tempt is  made  to  apply  to  facts  already  established  what 
is  thought  to  be,  on  the  whole,  a  new  interpretation.  To 
the  general  student,  educated  according  to  present  stand- 
ards, it  is  safe  to  say  that  our  thesis  will  come  with  all 
the  force  of  a  novel  proposition.  If  it  appeal  to  the 
scholar,  he  will  cautiously  add  the  conception  to  his  in- 
tellectual outfit. 

Our  examination  involves  a  sweeping  survey  of  social 
development,  commencing  on  the  levels  of  prehistoric 
animality,  and  passing  up  through  the  great  his- 
toric civilizations  that  have  contributed  to  the  world's 
higher  progress.  The  general  thesis  indicates  what  we 
conceive  to  be  one  of  the  most  important  factors  of  social 
evolution.  The  reader  may  be  assured  in  advance,  how- 
ever, that  we  identify  this  principle  with  only  a  small  part 
of  social  science.    The  danger  is  ever  present  of  erecting 


PREFACE. 


Special  principles  into  complete  philosophies;  and  as  we 
have  emphasized  this  in  the  text,  there  is  no  need  for 
special  stress  upon  it  here. 

The  application  of  the  main  thesis  to  universal  his- 
tory involves  an  inquiry  into  the  decline  and  fall  of  the 
earlier  historic  civilizations.  The  line  of  human  progress 
has,  indeed,  passed  up  from  prehistoric  beginnings 
through  the  ancient  oriental  and  classic  worlds  into 
modern  western  society.  But  the  ancient  civilizations,  de- 
spite their  progress,  did  not  endure;  and  the  wrecks  of 
many  nations  lie  along  the  path  of  social  development. 
Some  of  the  later  institutions  of  progressive  society  have 
issued  from  the  struggles  of  earlier  historic  societies  with 
the  problem  of  their  decline  and  fall;  and  if  our  inquiry 
should  ignore  the  retrogressive  aspects  of  human  history 
we  should  be  embarrassed  in  the  treatment  of  these  later 
institutions.  Social  development,  as  revealed  by  universal 
history,  is  not  only  a  struggle  for  progress,  but  a  struggle 
against  retrogression. 

Modern  historical  criticism  shows  that  the  decline 
of  ancient  oriental  society  coincided  with  the  rise  of 
Judaism  upon  the  wreck  of  an  earlier  Semitic  heathenism. 
The  decline  of  classic  civilization,  in  its  turn,  coincided 
with  the  rise  of  Christianity  upon  the  basis  of  Judaism. 
Our  treatment  of  the  decline  and  fall  of  the  earlier  his- 
toric nations  turns  upon  the  rise  of  these  two  great  reli- 
gions. In  other  words,  this  inquiry  carries  us  into  the 
fascinating  and  absorbing  fields  of  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ment history  and  criticism.  The  relevancy  of  this  part  of 
our  work  will  be  apparent  to  the  scholar.  To  the  mind 
still  possessed  by  the  idea  that  life  is  composed  of  a  num- 
ber of  distinct  "worlds,"  or  "departments,"  this  will  seem 
at  first  like  an  unwarranted  digression.  We  do  not,  how- 
ever, touch  upon  the  problems  of  Biblical  research  with 
the  aim  of  pronouncing  upon  them  from  conventional 
standpoints.  With  the  validity  of  religious  doctrines  a 
work  on  sociology  can  have  nothing  to  do,  for  a  discussion 
of   the   absolute    content    of    the    realities    with    which 


PREFACE. 


sociology  deals  carries  us  at  once  out  of  the  domain  of 
sociology.  The  right  of  sociology  to  deal  freely  from  its 
own  standpoint  with  our  sacred  literature  needs  to  be  em- 
phasized. 

The  modern  school  of  Biblical  criticism  is  un- 
doubtedly engaged  in  a  successful  application  of  the  same 
scientific  principles  that  have  been  brought  to  bear  upon 
history  at  large.  But  if  certain  positions  advanced  in 
this  book  are  valid,  Biblical  criticism  has  not  been  brought 
so  fully  into  line  with  scientific  research  as  it  might. 
Men  like  Wellhausen,  and  Robertson  Smith,  and  Cheyne 
adhere  to  many  conclusions  based  on  the  most  rigid  scien- 
tific grounds;  but  it  presently  becomes  evident  that  they 
are,  after  all,  preoccupied  by  an  apologetic  religious 
interest.  This  interest  may  be  more  subtle  than 
in  the  case  of  more  orthodox  and  less  heretical 
men;  but  it  is  there  nevertheless;  and  at  a  cer- 
tain point  in  their  work  its  influence  begins  to 
run  counter  to  their  own  scientific  principles.  It  seems 
to  us  that  the  critical  school  has  not  sufficiently  utilized 
the  sources,  both  inside  and  outside  the  Bible,  which  are 
available  to  the  investigator.  The  general  result  of  Bib- 
lical criticism  has  been  toward  the  assimilation  of  the  his- 
tory of  Israel  with  the  growth  of  society  at  large.  Some- 
times this  assimilation  is  complete;  sometimes  it  is  par- 
tial. The  defects  in  the  critical  process  hitherto,  as  we 
see  them,  result  from  the  fact  that  as  a  rule  Biblical 
scholars  lack  the  sociological  standpoint.  This  indeed  is 
inevitable.  Criticism  of  our  sacred  literature  is  only  a 
part  of  the  wider  critical  movement  which  has  subjected 
the  world's  literature  to  the  rigid  test  of  scientific  prin- 
ciples; and  this  critical  movement  is  itself  a  necessary 
antecedent  of  scientific  sociology. 

One  of  the  most  epoch-making  discoveries  ever  made 
is,  that  the  social  world  in  which  we  live  is  itself  an  object 
of  scientific  investigation.  Human  society  constitutes  the 
subject-matter  of  a  general  science.  Like  other  sciences  — 
and  more  than  many  of  them  —  sociology,  the  science  of 


PREFACE. 


society,  has  been  only  partially  worked  out.  This  fact, 
however,  should  no  more  count  against  sociology  than 
against  physics  or  biology.  The  science  of  society,  like 
other  sciences,  deals  with  phenomena.  It  makes  no  effort 
to  break  outside  the  charmed  circle  of  phenomena;  for 
if  the  sociologist  should  do  that  he  would  be  lost  in  the 
metaphysician.  Sociology  is  the  crown  of  all  the  sciences. 
It  comprehends,  and  also  transcends,  the  special  social 
sciences  like  politics,  economics,  and  ethics.  The  social 
sciences  are  in  themselves  nothing.  They  deal  only  with 
abstractions  from  the  reality  which  is  common  to  them 
all.  Sociological  training  is  the  necessary  summation  of 
all  the  experience  that  prepares  for  the  most  intelligent 
work  in  philosophy. 

It  is  believed  that  the  general  conception  of  this  work 
furnishes  a  practical  sociological  discipline  of  great  im- 
portance. It  helps  to  show  what  the  science  of  society  is ; 
and  it  emphasizes  that  the  special  social  sciences  deal  with 
phases  of  the  reality  common  to  them  all. 

The  book  itself  is  an  examination  of  society;  but  it 
does  not  try  to  formulate  a  definition  of  society.  It  is  a 
treatise  on  sociology;  but  it  does  not  try  to  formulate  a 
definition  of  sociology.  It  assumes  that  we  need  experi- 
ence of  society  and  sociology  more  than  precise  defini- 
tions of  either.  It  is  willing  to  let  definitions  grow  out 
of  experience,  without  trying  to  churn  experience  from 
definitions  born  out  of  due  time. 

We  have  tried  to  produce  a  text  which  will  be  in- 
telligible not  only  to  scholars,  but  to  non-technical  read- 
ers. This,  however,  not  without  misgivings.  Generally 
speaking,  a  new  thesis  ought  to  be  presented  first  in  tech- 
nical form  to  the  experts  who  are  qualified  to  pass  judg- 
ment on  it.  This  condition  has  been  partly  complied 
with  by  the  publication  of  the  paper  noted  above.  As  a 
plain  matter  of  fact,  if  a  book  of  this  nature  obtains  any 
recognition  from  competent  authorities,  it  is  sure  to  come 
into  the  hands  of  non-technical  readers.  People  of  in- 
telligence, who  need  a  guidance  in  sociology  which  has 


10  PREFACE. 

either  not  been  available,  or  of  which  they  are  not  in- 
formed, are  now  reaching  forth  for  books  from  which  they 
get  more  harm  than  good ;  and  we  have  tried  to  adapt  our 
treatment  with  these  facts  in  mind. 

We  should  like  to  acknowledge  the  guarded  encour- 
agement given  to  our  enterprise  by  Professor  Albion  W. 
Small,  of  the  University  of  Chicago.  His  kindly  interest 
has  been  a  stimulating  influence. 

August,  1903.  L.  W. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

PRELIMINARY     SURVEY. 

(Pages  19-28.) 

The  scientific  doctrine  of  evolution  as  applied  to  human  society. 
Bird's-eye  view  of  the  course  of  world-history,  from  primeval  savagery 
and  animality  up  through  the  oriental,  classic,  and  western  civilizations 
into  modern  society. 

CHAPTER  II. 

THE    PRIMITIVE    STRUGGLE    FOR    EXISTENCE. 

(Pages  29-37.) 

The  scientific  proposition  that  the  original  state  of  mankind  was 
that  of  savagery  and  animality,  unrelieved  by  progress  in  the  industrial 
arts.  Proofs  and  implications  of  this  proposition.  Primeval  men  neces- 
sarily scattered  over  the  earth  in  small  and  hostile  groups.  Large  societies 
impossible,  since  men  possessed  neither  the  material  tools  nor  the  knowl- 
edge whereby  to  develop  the  resources  of  nature. 

CHAPTER  III. 

PREHISTORIC   BEGINNINGS. 

(Pages  38-46.) 

Rough  Stone  Age.  Smooth  Stone  Age.  Early  Metal  Age.  Discovery 
of  fire.  Domestication  of  animals.  Saving  of  seed  for  planting.  Social 
effect  of  early  industrial  progress.  Prehistoric  family  groups  and  clans 
fuse  into  tribes.  Tribes  into  nations.  Nations  into  affiliated  groups. 
Early  stratification  of  growing  social  bodies  into  two  principal  classes^ 
upper  and  lower.  The  tremendous  fact  of  social  cleavage  into  upper 
and  lower  classes.  A  necessary  outcome  of  prior  conditions,  and  a 
step  in  human  progress.  Cleavage  based  primarily  upon  ownership 
of  the  lower  class  by  the  upper  class ;  and  later  (when  society  passed 
from  nomadism  to  settled  life)  upon  aristocratic  land  monopoly.  Ancient 
common  property  in  the  soil  not  democratic  communism,  but  upper 
class  communism. 

11 


12  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER    IV. 

THE    CAPITALIZATION    OF    SOCIAL    DEVELOPMENT. 

(Pages  47-59) 

The  integration,  or  drawing  together,  of  mankind  in  social  groups 
of  increasing  size  rests  upon  the  concomitant  integration  of  a  huge 
mass  of  material  and  spiritual  capital  whereby  the  resources  of  nature 
are  adapted  to  human  needs.  Present  day  civilization  based  upon  a  vast 
mass  of  capital  in  the  form  of  material  tools,  technical  knowledge,  etc. 
If  this  mountain  of  social  capital  were  destroyed,  men  would  be  reduced 
at  once  to  primeval  savagery.  Social  capital  not  accumulated  by  the  free 
combination  of  small  quantities  of  individual  capital.  Social  cleavage 
into  two  principal  classes,  upper  and  lower,  the  main  factor  in  the 
capitalisation  of  social  development.  The  significance  of  cleavage  not 
realized,  either  by  scholars  or  by  the  general  public.  Cleavage  known 
as  a  fact,  but  not  hitherto  treated  as  its  importance  demands.  Society  a 
collectivism  paradoxically  developing  under  the   forms  of  individualism. 

CHAPTER  V. 

ORIENTAL     CIVILIZATION. 

(Pages  60-196) 

Application  of  this  thesis  to  the  most  ancient  circle  of  "tommunitles 
that  lay  in  the  path  of  the  world's  higher  progress  —  the  society  centering 
around  the  eastern  seaboard  of  the  Mediterranean,  Egypt,  Chaldea,  etc. 
The  relation  of  social  cleavage  to  all  sides  of  ancient  oriental  life  — 
political,  industrial,  religious,  intellectual,  etc.  Paradoxical  nature  of 
cleavage.  An  instrument  of  social  good  and  evil  simultaneously.  The 
world  ruled  by  the  play  of  opposed  forces.  Decline  and  fall  of  the  ancient 
oriental  world  largely  involved  in  abuses  of  social  cleavage.  These 
propositions  as  to  both  aspects  of  cleavage  illustrated  in  dramatic  fashion 
by  the  history  of  Israel,  a  nation  which  lay  at  the  center  and  cross-roads 
of  the  ancient  civilization  here  under  survey.  Early  politics  and  religion 
united.  The  history  of  Israel  a  secular  history  under  the  guise  of  relig- 
ious history.  The  origin  and  social  nature  of  religion.  The  early  re- 
ligion of  Israel  shown  by  modern  historical  criticism  to  have  been  a 
local  Semitic  heathenism.  Israel  knew  no  god  by  the  name  of  "Jehovah." 
This  name  first  composed  by  a  European  monk.  The  true  name  of  Israel's 
national  god  partly  given  in  the  fourth  verse  of  psalm  68  under  the  form 
"jAH.^'  This  name- syllable  pronounced  as  in  the  word  "hallelu-jah." 
The  full  name  of  Israel's  national  god  to  be  rendered  thus :  "yahweh." 
Historical  reality  of  the  sojourn  of  certain  Israelitish  tribes  on  the  bor- 
ders of  Egypt.  Historical  reality  of  Moses.  The  man  Moses  a  pre- 
supposition of  Israelite  history.  The  part  played  by  Moses  in  the  escape 
of  Israel   from  the  borders  of  Egypt.     The  god  Yahweh  not  originally 


TABLE    OF   CONTENTS.  1» 

the  god  of  Israel.  Derived  by  covenant  from  the  Kenites,  a  nomadic 
people  in  the  region  of  Mount  Sinai,  opposite  the  northeastern  border 
of  Egypt.  Why  Moses  was  not  invited  to  the  sacrificial  meal  at  Mount 
Sinai.  The  economic  basis  of  all  these  movements.  The  covenant  be- 
tween the  Israelites,  the  Kenites,  and  Yahweh,  interpreted  by  the  social 
consciousness  as  the  choice,  or  election,  of  Israel,  by  the  god  Yahweh. 
Attack  of  the  allied  Israelites  and  Kenites,  under  the  assumed  leadership 
of  Yahweh,  upon  the  land  of  Canaan.  This  movement  plainly  an  eco- 
nomic movement  arising  from  the  needs  of  Israelites  and  Kenites.  The 
Kenites  partly  absorbed  into  Israel.  The  partial  nature  of  the  so  called 
"conquest  of  Canaan"  by  Israel  revealed  in  Judges  1 :  27-36  and  numer- 
ous other  sources.  The  vast  importance  of  social  cleavage  as  a  fact  in  the 
social  history  of  Israel.  The  Israelite  invaders  unable  to  take  the  Canaan- 
ite  cities.  The  subjugation  of  the  Canaanite  agricultural  districts  by  the 
Israelites.  The  Israelites  a  rustic  aristocracy  during  the  period  of  the 
"Judges."  Multiplication  of  alliances  and  unions  between  the  Israelite 
agricultural  upper  class  and  the  Canaanite  city  upper  class.  Gradual- 
mingling  and  reconciliation  of  the  population.  Marriage  of  Gideon,  an 
Israelite  clan  chief,  with  a  woman  of  the  Canaanite  city  of  Shechem  a 
good  example  of  this.  Abortive  attempt  of  the  Gideonites  to  found  a 
kingdom  embracing  city  and  country.  Final  union  of  Israelites  and 
Canaanites  forced  by  pressure  of  the  Philistines,  Ammonites,  and  other 
outsiders.  The  centripetal  direction  of  the  Israelite  kingship  from  country 
to  city.  Gideon  an  Israelite  clan  chief  in  the  agricultural  districts.  King^ 
Saul  a  country  aristocrat  from  first  to  last.  King  David  marries  a 
daughter  of  Saul ;  then  contracts  a  union  with  Abigail,  widow  of  Nabal, 
a  wealthy  rustic  landlord;  but  later  in  life  is  identified  with  Jerusalem, 
"the  city  of  David."  King  Solomon  and  all  subsequent  kings,  men  of 
the  city.  Passage  of  the  Kingship  from  country  to  city  a  sign  of  the 
concomitant  passage  of  economic  power  in  Canaanitish  Israel  in  the  same 
direction.  The  political  conditions  underlying  and  controlling  the  rise 
of  Yahweh  from  the  state  of  a  tribal  god  to  that  of  a  national  deity,  and 
presently  to  that  of  an  imperial  god.  Worship  of  the  Canaanite  baalim, 
or  local  gods,  a  sign  of  the  Canaanite  element  in  the  mingled  blood  of 
Canaanitish  Israel.  Gradual  contraction  upon  itself  of  the  upper  class 
of  slaveholders  and  landowners.  Real  estate  in  Israel  falls  more  and 
more  into  the  power  of  city  aristocrats  and  large  rustic  proprietors.. 
This  largely  caused  by  poorly  adjusted  system  of  taxation,  which  pressed 
more  heavily  upon  the  country  districts  than  upon  city  property.  Con- 
sequent increasing  economic  difficulties  of  the  less  wealthy  members  of 
the  upper  class.  David  undertakes  a  census  of  Israel  —  probably  to 
ascertain  extent  of  taxable  property.  His  son  Solomon  marks  the  king- 
dom into  taxation  districts  regardless  of  tribal  and  clan  affiliations. 
Division  of  the  kingdom  over  the  matter  of  taxation  at  the  accession  of 
Rehoboam.  The  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah.  Gradual  social  decline 
of  both  kingdoms.     Gradual  idealization  of  the  imagined  earlier  golden 


14  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

age  of  David  and  Solomon.  Continued  contraction  of  the  upper  class 
upon  itself.  Concentration  of  property  and  of  economic  power  in  rela- 
tively fewer  and  fewer  hands.  Evolution  of  prophecy,  or  forthspeaking 
on  behalf  of  the  divine.  Dramatic  role  of  prophecy  in  this  history.  The 
opinion  of  the  majority  of  the  people  that  Yahweh  had  deserted  them. 
Startling  claim  of  the  minority,  as  voiced  by  the  prophets,  that  Israel's 
troubles  were  the  issue  of  Israel's  own  unfaithfulness  to  the  contract  with 
Yahweh  at  Mount  Sinai.  Yahweh  had  raised  Israel  to  glory  in  former 
times,  and  conquered  every  god  with  whom  his  chosen  people  came 
in  contact.  But  Israel  had  served  the  gods  of  other  nations  as  well  as 
the  baalim  of  the  Canaanites,  the  "former  inhabitants  of  the  country," 
who  were  now  asserted  by  tradition  to  have  been  driven  out  by  Yahweh. 
The  great  Elijah,  or  Eli-yah,  who  declared  that  Yahweh  was  the  only 
"el,"  or  god,  for  Israel  to  serve.  Marriage  of  King  Ahab  of  the  northern 
Icingdom  with  Jezebel  of  Tyre.  Alliance  with  Tyre;  and  erection  of 
altars  to  the  Tyrian  baal.  Alliance  of  Judah  and  Tyre.  Bloody  revolu- 
tions of  Jehu  and  Jehoash  in  both  Israelite  kingdoms,  whereby  worship 
of  the  Tyrian  god  was  put  down,  and  his  votaries  were  killed  in  accordance 
with  the  program  of  Elijah,  who  desired  Israel  to  "return"  to  Yahweh. 
Jehonadab,  the  upper-class  Kenite  Rechabite,  who  came  in  from  his 
home  in  the  rural  districts  at  the  time  of  the  revolution  of  Jehu,  to 
associate  with  the  usurping  king  and  see  his  "zeal"  for  Yahweh.  Soci- 
ological basis  for  the  assimilation  of  "righteousness"  with  the  worship 
of  the  national  god  of  Israel.  The  claims  and  program  of  prophecy 
formulated  in  the  rural  districts.  Elijah  a  rustic.  Elisha,  his  disciple, 
called  from  the  plow  handles.  Amos  a  herdsman.  Micah  a  resident  of  a 
■country  village  in  the  Shephelah.  But  in  the  person  of  Isaiah,  prophecy 
at  length  follows  the  line  of  the  kingship,  and  enters  the  city,  to  remain 
at  the  center  of  the  social  problem  to  the  last.  The  reaction  between 
country  and  city  an  imperative  fact  in  the  history  of  Canaanitish  Israel. 
The  development  of  the  message  of  the  prophets.  The  psychology  of  the 
prophets.  How  Yahweh  of  Sinai  finally  became  the  imperial  sovereign 
of  heaven  and  earth  (in  the  mind  of  Israel).  Importance  of  the  Baby- 
lonish Exile  in  fixing  the  religion  of  Israel  in  its  later,  monotheistic  form. 
The  religious  contrast  between  post-Exilic  Israel  and  pre-Exilic  Israel. 
The  social  identity  of  post-Exilic  and  pre-Exilic  Israel.  The  religion  of 
Israel  transformed  indeed  from  a  local  Semitic  heathenism  into  an  im- 
perial, ethical  monotheism;  but  the  great  social  problem,  which  the 
prophets  attacked,  still  unsolved.  The  prophetic  party  deceived  by  the 
forms  of  society,  and  incapable  of  understanding  the  organic  nature  of 
the  social  problem.  Society  a  collectivism  developing,  and  also  decaying, 
under  the  forms  of  individualism.  Futility  of  the  prophetic  prescription 
of  individual  righteousness  as  a  solution  for  the  social  problem.  The 
message  of  prophetism  founded  upon  a  vast  "post-hoc"  fallacy.  Evidence 
as  to  social  cleavage  in  the  post-Exilic  psalms,  proverbs,  wisdom  writings 
and  apocryphal  books.     Continued  decline  of  society  at  the  eastern  end 


TABLE   OF   CONTENTS.  15 

of  the  Mediterranean.     Gradual   shifting  of  the  center  of  historical   in- 
terest and  social  headship  to  the  northern  coasts'  of  the  Great  Sea. 

CHAPTER   VI. 

CLASSIC    CIVILIZATION. 

(Pages  197-231) 

Further  application  of  the  general  conception  to  the  Greek  and 
Roman  societies.  Social  cleavage  established  in  the  prehistoric  period 
of  classic  civilization  upon  precisely  the  same  basis  as  in  oriental  civilization. 
The  clan  aristocracy  the  original  factor  in  Greek  and  Roman  politics.  The 
growth  of  trade  and  manufacture  in  the  northern  Mediterranean  exceeds 
the  industrialism  of  the  ancient  eastern  world.  Rise  of  the  classic  "Third 
Estate"  to  economic  equality  with  the  clan  aristocracy,  or  patrician  element. 
Struggle  of  the  patricians  and  plebeians  issues  in  the  enfranchisement  of 
men  upon  the  basis  of  wealth  instead  of  upon  the  more  ancient  basis 
of  descent.  This  change  a  matter  of  great  sociological  importance.  So- 
ciety now  becomes  impersonal  in  its  political  phase.  Along  with  the 
retrocession  of  ancient  family  aristocracy,  fatherhood  ceases  to  rule  and 
protect  the  state.  Consequently  the  social  ideal  of  fatherhood  loses  its 
military  character,  and  becomes  more  industrial,  domestic  and  lovable. 
Profoundly  democratic  effect  of  these  transformations  upon  the  social 
mind.  Greece  and  Rome  extend  their  empire  all  around  the  Mediter- 
ranean, including  the  remains  of  ancient  Israel  within  the  circle  of  these 
influences.  The  social  problem  of  cleavage,  however,  adavnces  to  the 
same  issue  in  the  later  civilization  as  in  the  earlier  civilization.  In  the 
midst  of  this  declining  social  world  Christianity  rises  upon  the  foundations 
of  Judaism,  and  centers  about  the  person  of  Jesus,  the  prophet  of  Nazareth. 
The  problem  of  the  psychology  of  Jesus.  The  rise  of  Christianity  a  later 
chapter  in  the  psychology  of  the  prophets.  Christianity  spreads  at  first  in 
the  lower  social  class;  but  issues  at  length  in  a  great  politico-religious 
engine  with  an  aristocratic  constitution  —  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
Continued  decline  of  the  classic  world.  Final  collapse  of  the  Roman 
Empire  in  the  West.     Influx  of  the  barbarians. 

CHAPTER    VII. 

WESTERN     CIVILIZATION. 

(Pages  232-278) 

Extended  application  of  this  thesis  to  western  society,  beginning  on 
the  same  level  as  in  the  chapters  on  the  oriental  and  classic  worlds.  The 
plan  of  history  broadens  in  scope  still  further.  Current  misunderstanding 
of  American  history  and  social  development.  It  represents  the  efilux  of 
civilized  men  and  capital  upon  a  vast  empire  of  good,  unmonopolized,  and 
easily  accessible  soil.     American  history  begins  in  the  older  civilizations. 


16  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER    VIII. 

WESTERN  CIVILIZATION — (contifiued). 

(Pages  279-318) 

The  problem  of  cleavage  in  western  society.    England,  Germany  and 
the  United  States.    The  great  social  paradox. 


Bibliography  319-322 

Index    323f. 


ERRATA. 

Page  18  (on  fly-leaf)  :  In  fourth  quotation  from  A.  W.  Small, 
instead  of  The  concept  of  "individualism"  read  The  concept  "individual."' 
The  sentence  is  correctly  given  in  the  more  extended  quotation  at  page  55. 

Page  265:    Instead  of  emigrants     read  immigrants. 


The  sociologist  maintains  that  specialism  is  partialism  unless  it  is 
organized  into  realism.  —  Albion  W.  Small,  The  American  Journal  of 
Sociology,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  167. 

The  paramount  duty  of  social  scholarship  at  the  present  moment  is  to 
reckon  with  the  epoch-making  fact  that  to-day's  men  have  gradually 
cut  the  moorings  of  ethical  and  social  tradition  after  tradition,  and  that 
society  is  to-day  adrift,  without  definite  purpose  to  shape  its  course,  and 
without  a  supreme  conviction  to  give  it  motion.  —  Idem,  The  American 
Journal  of  Sociology,  Vol.  I,  p.  567. 

Society  is  ethically  bankrupt.  We  have  some  ethical  assets,  but  they 
are  a  small  percentage  of  our  liabilities.  Speaking  generally,  our  ethical 
capital  consists  of  a  heterogeneous  collection  of  provincial  moralities.  .  . 
There  is  a  permanent  world's  exposition  of  clashing  moral  standards.  — 
Idem,  Decennial  Publications  of  the  University  of  Chicago,  Vol.  IV.,  pp. 
115,  116. 

The  concept  of  "individualism"  is  one  of  our  convenient  concessions 
to  our  intellectual  incapacity.  —  Idem,  Decennial  Publications,  Vol.  IV, 
p.  128. 

The  individualistic  conception  of  human  affairs  is  not  utterly  false. 
It  is  a  rough,  uncritical,  inexact  exaggeration  of  a  perception  which  must 
be  reduced  to  more  precise  and  proportionate  formulation.  To-day's 
sociology  is  still  struggling  with  this  preposterous  initial  fact  of  the  in- 
dividual. He  is  the  only  possible  social  unity,  and  he  is  no  longer  a  think- 
able possibility.  He  is  the  only  real  presence,  and  he  is  never  present. 
Whether  we  are  near  to  resolution  of  the  paradox  or  not,  there  is 
hardly  more  visible  consensus  about  the  relation  of  the  individual  to  the 
whole  than  at  any  earlier  period.  Indeed,  the  minds  of  more  people 
than  ever  seem  to  be  puzzled  by  the  seeming  antinomy  between  the  indi- 
vidual and  the  whole.  —  Idem,  The  American  Journal  of  Sociology,  Vol. 
V,  p.  514,  515. 

Doubtless  the  social'  problem  has  waited  longer  than  it  ought  for  ade- 
quate formulation,  because  many  men  have  believed  too  implicitly  with 
Plato  that  "ideas  make  the  world."  Such  men  have  told  the  story  of 
history  as  though  it  were  a  ghost-dance  on  a  floor  of  clouds.  They  have 
tried  to  explain  how  spirits  with  indiscernible  bodies  have  brought  about 
the  visible  results.  They  would  not  admit  that  the  facts  of  human  asso- 
ciation have  been  the  work  of  flesh-and-blood  men  with  their  feet  on  the 
ground.  —  Idem,  The  American  Journal  of  Sociology,  Yol.  V,  p.  518. 

18 


CHAPTER    I. 


PRELIMINARY  SURVEY. 


§1.  —  Modern  scientific  research  brings  out  into  bold 
relief  the  fact  that  civilization  is  the  result  of  a  process 
of  growth,  or  development,  which  took  its  rise  on  the 
levels  of  savagery  and  animality  long  before  historical 
times.  This  evolutionary  process,  moreover,  still  goes  on 
around  us.  Whether  or  not  the  theory  be  true  that  man- 
kind have  ultimately  descended  from  some  lower  species 
of  animal,  we  must  at  all  events  accept  the  view  that  man 
once  lived  on  the  earth  without  knowledge  of  the  ma- 
terial arts,  in  an  animal  condition,  whence  he  rose,  by  a 
gradual  process  of  development,  into  civilized  society. 
This  moderate  position  —  which  should  always  be  dis- 
tinguished from  the  radical  view  —  is  supported  by  many 
lines  of  positive  evidence,  and  commands  the  assent  of 
all  competent  authorities.  Quite  naturally,  indeed,  those 
who  hold  that  historical  man  is  descended  from  prehis- 
toric ancestors  who  lived  an  animal  existence,  are  likely 
also  to  hold,  as  we  do,  that  prehistoric  men  were,  in  turn, 
derived  from  a  non-human  stock.  But  for  the  student 
of  the  rise  and  growth  of  civilized  society,  it  is  practically 
sufficient  to  accept  the  evolutionary  doctrine  as  more  nar- 
rowly applied.  In  other  words,  unless  we  are  approaching 
the  study  of  man  from  the  biological  standpoint,  we  may 
ignore  the  matter  of  his  physical  origin,  and  enter  upon 
our  work  at  those  levels  of  animality  and  savagery  whence 
man  has  passed  upward  through  barbarism  into  civiliza- 
tion. This  narrower  doctrine  does  not  affirm  that  pro- 
gress is  uniform;  nor  does  it  hold  that  progress  admits 
of  no  retrogression.     It  declares  that,  on  the  whole,  hu- 

19 


20  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

manity  is  a  rising,  or  progressive,  race;  that  some  sec- 
tions of  the  race  exhibit  more  progressive  tendencies  than 
others;  and  that  progress  tends  eventually  to  become 
generalized.* 

Although  it  has  been  fully  shown  by  many  writers 
that  evolution  is  a  great  law  of  history,  a  current  popular 
idea  is  that  conditions  in  general  have  somehow  gone 
backward  from  an  almost  perfect  state  of  things  —  "the 
good  old  times.''  Let  it  be  emphasized,  however,  that  this 
idea,  opposed  as  it  is  to  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  is  per- 
fectly natural  in  view  of  human  psychology  and  the  condi- 
tions under  which  progress  takes  place.  There  are  at 
least  two  reasons  for  the  vitality  of  this  mistaken  view  of 
life.  In  the  first  place,  it  contains  a  small  measure  of 
truth.  Progress  plainly  involves  losses  that  are,  at  the 
least  estimate,  temporary.  If  we  look  at  progress  from  a 
narrow  standpoint,  and  fail  to  take  a  broad  view,  these 
losses  assume  undue  proportions;  and  a  primary  ten- 
dency of  our  minds  is  to  look  at  things  from  the  narrow 
standpoint.  In  the  second  place,  the  retrogressive  theory 
has  been  a  most  effective  practical  stimulus  to  progress. 
In  a  slowly  developing  world  the  existence  of  a  wide- 
spread longing  to  recover  the  felicity  of  some  fancied 
Golden  Age  in  the  distant  past  helps  to  urge  man  along 
the  upward  path. 

It  remains  for  the  popular  mind  to  adjust  itself  to 
the  new  intellectual  atmosphere.  Despite  the  great  pro- 
gress of  the  idea  of  development,  it  has  not  yet  been 
brought  home  in  a  practical  way  to  the  daily,  popular 
thought.  Looking  abroad  in  the  world,  it  is  plain  that 
while  the  doctrine  of  evolution  is  fully  intrenched  in  some 
quarters,  it  remains  within  comparatively  narrow  limits. 
It  is,  indeed,  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  civiliza- 

*  The  term  "evolution,"  as  used  in  this  book,  will  have  the  nar- 
rower meaning  given  it  in  the  text,  unless  we  make  .specific  mention  of 
the  more  thoroughgoing  doctrine  of  man's  descent  from  non-human  stock, 
etc.  We  use  the  word  loosely  as  the  equivalent  of  growth,  development, 
and  progress. 


PRELIMINARY   SURVEY.  21 

tion  has  in  some  way  arisen  out  of  a  simpler  and  ruder 
state  of  things;  but  this  knowledge  lies  vaguely  in  the 
background  of  the  public  mind,  and  finds  little  or  no  ap- 
plication to  practical  questions.  Current  public  opinion 
is  usually  based  on  discouragingly  narrow  premises. 

§  2.  —  Although  we  must,  in  this  inquiry,  assume  the 
truth  of  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  without  special  at- 
tempt at  proof,  it  may  be  well  briefly  to  set  down  here  th(j 
essential  points  of  the  argument  for  that  doctrine  as  ap- 
plied to  human  society. 

First  of  all,  historical  records  clearly  show  that  civi- 
lization has  grown  up  out  of  barbarism.  Following  the 
course  of  history  backward  and  forward,  we  see  that  there 
has  been  unfolded  a  series  of  developmental,  or  evolution- 
ary, steps. 

But  w^ritten  history  does  not  give  us  the  earliest  chap- 
ters of  this  great  process.  It  does,  indeed,  supply  more 
than  we  are  commonly  inclined  to  admit;  but  it  does  not 
take  up  the  story  at  a  point  that  can  be  in  any  way  dis- 
tinguished as  a  beginning.  It  breaks  in,  so  to  speak,  upon 
a  drama  that  has  already  begun.  For  the  purpose  of  the 
sociological  student,  written  history  is  fairly  complete. 
It  gives  the  essentials.  But  in  the  ancient  period  it  begins 
to  fail ;  the  twilight  of  tradition  and  myth  gathers ;  and  at 
last  we  are  left  to  grope  in  the  darkness  of  antiquity. 

What,  now,  is  the  student  of  social  evolution  to  do? 
Let  us  turn  away  from  written  records  for  a  time,  and 
look  elsewhere.  Widely  distributed  over  the  world  —  in 
Europe,  America,  Asia,  Africa,  and  in  fact  wherever  in- 
vestigation has  been  carried  —  are  found  rude  tools  in  the 
crust  of  the  earth.  These  implements  consist  of  axes,  ham- 
mers, knives,  arrow-heads,  scrapers,  awls,  and  other  ar- 
ticles of  stone  and  metal.  Now,  we  learn  nothing  trust- 
worthy from  written  history  about  the  nature  and  origin 
of  these  tools.  In  ancient  Egypt  and  Chaldea  they  were 
thought  to  be  of  supernatural  origin,  and  were  used  in 
connection  with  religious  rites.  In  Europe,  during  the 
Middle  Age,   they  were  commonly  known  as   "thunder- 


22  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

stones."  It  was  thought  that  they  fell  from  the  skies  dur- 
ing storms;  and  that  they  had  been  used  in  the  "wars  in 
heaven,"  and  afterward  thrown  to  the  earth.  But  there 
is  now  no  doubt  that  they  are  the  tools  used  by  races  which 
peopled  the  world  long  before  historical  times  —  prehis- 
toric men,  who  had  not  wit  enough  to  make  and  preserve 
a  written  record  of  their  own  existence.  We  have,  indeed, 
no  direct  knowledge  of  this ;  but  the  physical  evidence  of 
it  is  just  as  good,  and  is  entitled  to  as  much  credit,  as  evi- 
dence that  we  receive  and  act  upon  every  day.  If,  in  pass- 
ing through  a  field,  we  see  marks  like  those  made  by  wheels 
and  the  feet  of  horses,  we  never  think  of  doubting  that  a 
vehicle  of  some  sort,  drawn  by  a  horse  of  some  color,  has 
been  there  before  us.  In  the  same  way,  the  existence  of 
these  rude  implements,  buried  in  the  soil  of  Europe,  Asia, 
Africa,  America,  and  elsewhere,  taken  in  connection  with 
the  fact  that  written  history  from  ancient  to  modern  times 
has  nothing  trustworthy  to  tell  us  about  them,  proves,  as 
well  as  anything  can  be  proved  from  abundant  physical 
evidence,  that  the  earth  was  peopled  in  prehistoric  ages 
by  races  of  primitive  men. 

Not  until  the  nineteenth  century  were  these  remains 
investigated  in  a  thoroughgoing  scientific  spirit;  and  the 
results  are  even  more  impressive  than  at  first  appears. 
Very  much  more  has  been  demonstrated  than  the  mere  fact 
that  rude  men  peopled  the  earth  before  the  times  of  writ- 
ten history.  The  prehistoric  implements  are  not  all  found 
at  the  same  distance  from  the  surface.  They  are  discov- 
ered at  various  levels  —  some  higher,  some  lower ;  and  in 
general  are  distributed  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  that  all 
have  not  been  where  they  are  during  the  same  length  of 
time.  As  a  rule,  those  that  evidently  have  been  in  place 
the  longest  are  buried  deepest,  and  are  significantly  the 
rudest  of  all.  These  most  primitive  tools  are  made  of 
stone,  broken  into  pieces  and  brought  into  shape  without 
smoothing  or  polishing.  Higher  up  are  found  more  vari- 
ous tools,  made  with  more  care  and  art,  more  regular  in 
shape,  and  finished  more  smoothly,  making  better  instru- 


PRELIMINARY   SURVEY.  23 

ments  for  cutting,  piercing,  scraping,  grinding,  etc. 
Among  these  later  tools  we  begin  to  find  parts  of  the 
human  skeleton;  but  the  bones  of  man  and  the  smaller 
animals  do  not,  as  a  rule,  survive  the  action  of  natural 
forces.  Only  the  skeletons  of  larger  animals,  like  the 
mammoth  and  the  mastodon,  are  well  preserved.  Going 
higher,  and  coming  still  nearer  the  surface,  the  polished 
stone  implements  begin  to  be  mingled  with  utensils  of 
copper  and  bronze.  In  these  deposits  the  bones  of  men  and 
animals  are  more  common.  Thus  there  is  an  ascent  clearly 
marked  out,  beginning  with  the  Kough  Stone  Age,  pass- 
ing up  through  the  Smooth  Stone  Age,  and  thence  into 
the  Age  of  Metals.  The  conclusion  is  irresistible:  Not 
only  did  primitive  men  exist  on  the  earth  long  before  the 
era  of  written  records;  but  they  were  at  the  same  time 
subject  to  the  law  of  progress,  development,  or  evolution. 

By  a  study  of  these  remains  we  find  that  man's  con- 
dition in  later  prehistoric  ages  was  practically  the  same 
as  in  the  earlier  age  of  written  history.  Presently  we  find 
ourselves  driven  on  to  the  conclusion  that  the  progress 
which  took  place  before  historical  times  was  the  earlier 
aspect  of  the  same  progress  which  has  gone  forward  dur- 
ing the  times  of  written  records.  In  other  words,  prehis- 
toric progTess  and  historic  progress  are  parts  of  one  great 
evolutionary  movement  whereby  modern  civilization  has 
grown  up  from  the  levels  of  rudest  savagery  and  animal- 
ity.  This  conclusion  is  fully  sustained  by  all  manner  of 
research  into  the  history,  antiquities,  and  life  of  man- 
kind. The  doctrine  of  evolution  is  indeed  the  only  doc- 
trine that  gives  us  an  intelligible  rendering  of  human  his- 
tory and  human  society. 

§  3.  —  The  material  for  a  study  of  the  process  of  so- 
cial evolution  is  extensive  and  various. 

For  prehistoric  times  we  have  the  remains  of  extinct 
races.  These  remains  are  found,  as  observed  above,  all 
over  the  world  beneath  the  crust  in  the  same  general 
order,  beginning  lowest  down  with  tools  of  rough  stone, 
passing  upward  through  deposits  of  smooth  stone  uten- 


24  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

sils,  and  thence  to  metal  implements.  This  material  is 
now  represented  by  many  public  and  private  collections, 
and  a  large  body  of  literature. 

It  is  certain  that  the  prehistoric  career  of  humanity 
extended  over  a  mucli  longer  stretch  of  time  than  the 
period  embraced  within  the  few  thousand  years  of  writ- 
ten history.  Nevertheless,  progress  during  prehistoric 
ages  was  so  slow,  and  general  conditions  w^ere  necessarily 
so  simple,  that  the  essentials  of  the  story  of  man  before 
his  appearance  in  the  field  of  history  are  easily  recovered 
and  briefly  told.  It  is  the  later  and  more  complex  periods, 
whereof  we  possess  written  record,  that  demand  the  closer 
attention,  and  are  more  difficult  to  understand  and  ex- 
plain. We  are,  it  is  true,  disposed  to  think  that  the  reverse 
of  this  must  be  the  case.  At  first  thought,  it  seems  as  if 
the  prehistoric  period,  of  which  there  is  no  written  record, 
would  present  greater  difficulties  to  the  student  than  the 
age  of  written  history.  But  in  a  very  important  sense,  as 
Just  observed,  this  is  not  so.  The  growth  of  society,  like 
the  growth  of  a  plant  or  an  animal,  is  from  the  relatively 
simple  to  the  relatively  complex;  and  life  in  prehistoric 
times  was  of  necessity  very  simple  as  compared  with  life 
now.  The  results  of  the  modern  deductive  and  inductive 
reconstruction  of  early  human  life  and  progress  are  mar- 
velous. 

The  knowledge  derived  from  the  study  of  prehistoric 
remains  is  widened  and  deepened  by  a  comparative  exam- 
ination of  the  lower  races  now  living  in  the  world.  These 
races  are  not  the  degenerates  of  a  high  civilization.  They 
are  simply  wayside  survivors  from  prehistoric  times,  hav- 
ing made  various  degrees  of  progress,  and  then  stopped 
or  slightly  retrograded ;  and  a  study  of  their  customs,  in- 
dustries, languages,  and  traditions  is  of  great  importance 
to  the  social  student.  We  now  have  at  our  disposal  an 
immense  mass  of  information  relating  to  the  more  back- 
ward races  in  all  parts  of  the  world.  This  material  would 
justly  be  open  to  suspicion  if  it  were  more  limited  in  quan- 
tity and  of  merely  local  scope.    But  it  is  of  great  extent, 


PRELIMINARY   SURVEY.  25 

and  has  been  accumulated  by  the  independent  observa- 
tions of  thousands  of  travelers  and  missionaries  in  all 
parts  of  the  world ;  and  a  comparative  study  of  it  reveals 
the  operation  of  the  same  tendencies  everywhere. 

For  study  of  the  historical  period  we  have  written 
records,  which  carry  the  view  forward  from  ancient  to 
modern  times.  These  records  are  of  the  most  diverse  char- 
acter, from  inscriptions  on  stone  or  metal,  giving  some 
detail  of  local  import,  to  written  and  printed  dissertations 
with  a  broad  outlook  over  large  areas  of  life.  All  authori- 
tative historical  works  —  like  Mommsen's  History  of 
Rome,  and  Green's  History  of  the  English  —  are  based  on 
a  critical  sifting  of  these  primary  sources. 

The  social  process  as  it  goes  on  around  us  at  present 
can  be  viewed  practically  at  first  hand  in  its  whole  extent. 

The  importance  of  each  class  of  our  material  consists 
not  only  in  its  inherent  value,  but  in  its  relations  to  other 
kinds  of  material.  Each  class  throws  light  on  every  other 
class;  and  the  total  value  of  all  the  material  at  our  dis- 
posal is  much  greater  than  the  sum  of  the  values  of  each 
particular  class. 

Altogether,  the  available  sources  enable  us  to  recover 
the  facts  of  social  development  in  a  fairly  satisfactory 
way  —  not  so  fully  as  we  would,  but  with  sufficient  cer- 
tainty to  afford  a  safe  basis  for  the  interpretation  of  es- 
sential facts  and  principles. 

§  4.  —  At  first  glance  there  seems  to  be  no  justifica- 
tion for  speaking  in  a  general  way  about  the  "develop- 
ment of  society."  Whether  the  outlook  be  upon  the  pres- 
ent or  the  past,  the  field  seems  to  be  divided  between 
separate  social  groups  rather  than  occupied  by  anything 
that  merits  comprehensive  treatment.  But  a  closer  view 
reveals  a  well  defined  growth-process  working  out  through 
universal  history. 

In  order  to  give  our  thought  graphic  points  of  attach- 
ment, let  us  use  a  map  of  the  world  on  Mercator  pro- 
jection. (See  map  accompanying  text).  At  the  right  are 
Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa.    At  the  left,  North  and  South 


PRELIMINARY   SURVEY.  27 

America.     Here  we  have  an  outline  of  the  great  stage 
whereon  the  drama  of  social  development  unfolds  itself. 

Now,  prehistoric  remains  indicate  that  a  limited 
measure  of  progress  was  made  in  early  ages  throughout 
the  entire  world. 

But  while  there  has  been  a  limited  measure  of  pro- 
gress everyT\^here,  the  higher  development  of  mankind  has- 
been  worked  out  by  a  relatively  small  part  of  the  race. 
This  higher  evolution  has  been  accomplished  by  three 
great  historic  civilizations,  or  circles  of  communities. 

The  earliest  of  these  to  emerge  from  the  darkness  of 
prehistoric  times  into  the  daylight  of  history  was  the  an- 
cient oriental  civilization.  (See  map).  This  great  circle 
of  communities  was  located  near  the  eastern  extremity 
of  the  Mediterranean  sea,  and  included  the  Egyptians, 
Babylonians,  Phenicians,  Assyrians,  Israelites,  etc.  Ori- 
ental civilization  contributed  much  to  the  development  of 
society;  but  it  carried  forward  the  work  of  progress  only 
a  relatively  short  distance,  and  then  —  as  if  the  task  were 
too  heavy  —  went  into  stagnation. 

Oriental  achievements,  however,  were  not  lost.  An- 
other group  of  peoples  now  came  into  the  light  of  history^ 
absorbed  the  culture  of  the  older  circle  of  communities, 
and  assumed  the  leadership  of  progress.  This  group  in- 
cluded the  races  of  Greece  and  Italy.  It  was  located  in 
the  northern  Mediterranean  lands;  and  is  known  collect- 
ively as  the  classic  civilization.  (See  map).  Its  contri- 
butions to  the  growth  of  society  were  great ;  but  it  also  at 
length  fell  into  stagnation. 

And  now  a  third  circle  of  communities  emerged  from 
the  darkness  of  prehistoric  beginnings.  Arising  out  of 
barbarism  and  savagery,  as  did  the  classic  and  oriental 
nations,  these  latter  communities  have  expanded  in  cen- 
tral and  western  Europe,  and  overflowed  into  America 
and  other  lands.  The  largest  and  most  important  of  the 
states  constructed  out  of  them  are  Germany,  France,  Eng- 
land, and  the  United  States.  These  nations  constitute  the 
center  of  western  civilization.     (See  map).  Successors  to 


28  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  task  of  the  oriental  and  classic  civilizations,  and  heirs 
of  their  achievements,  the  nations  of  the  west  are  in  the 
forefront  of  human  progress. 

Thus  there  come  gradually  into  view  the  gigantic  out- 
lines of  an  evolution  which  has  no  local  boundaries,  and 
ever  tends  to  include  the  world.  In  studying  universal 
history,  then,  we  must  — 

First  —  conceive  of  the  entire  prehistoric  world  as 
making  various  degrees  of  progress  from  animality.  And 
we  must  — 

Second  —  picture  the  majority  of  the  races  of  man- 
kind as  halting  at  various  way-stations  along  the  path  of 
social  growth,  taking  up,  as  it  were,  a  waiting  attitude, 
while  — 

Third  —  the  more  progressive  minority  embraced  in 
the  oriental,  classic,  and  western  civilizations  vicariously 
works  out  that  economic,  political,  and  intellectual  cul- 
ture which  is  today  being  generalized  over  the  earth. 

From  this  preliminary  survey  we  pass  on  to  a  closer 
study  of  the  field  here  marked  out.  Our  inquiry  will  at 
first  have  to  do  with  the  prehistoric  world  in  general. 
Then,  after  stating  our  main  thesis,  we  shall  narrow  the 
scope  of  our  survey  to  the  first  great  historic  civilization 
—  the  oriental,  —  passing  thence  through  the  classic 
world,  and  thence  onward  into  our  own  western  society. 


CHAPTER  II. 


THE  PRIMITIVE  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE. 


§  5.  —  If  civilization  is  the  outcome  of  an  evolution- 
ary process  which  began  on  the  levels  of  animality,  it  fol- 
lows that  early  prehistoric  men  must  once  have  lived  the 
life  of  animals.  In  this  chapter  we  shall  try  to  obtain  a 
clear  idea  of  what  that  life  was.  As  previously  observed, 
we  are  able  to  trace  the  course  of  man's  life  backward 
through  the  Age  of  Metals  and  the  Smooth  Stone  Period 
into  the  time  when  he  used  only  rough  implements  of 
stone  and  wood.  Below  this  latter  point  all  physical  evi- 
dence is  lacking.  Now,  it  makes  no  vital  difference  to 
the  argument  of  this  book  whether  man  began  his  career 
on  or  below  the  level  of  the  early  stone  age.  But  in  the 
interests  of  clear  thinking,  it  is  well  for  us  to  push  the  view 
backward  to  a  time  slightly  anterior  to  that  period,  and 
begin  with  man  before  he  had  learned  to  fashion  tools. 
If  it  be  objected  that  under  such  conditions  man  would 
not  have  been  distinguished  from  the  higher  apes,  and 
would  not  have  been  man  at  all,  the  answer  is  that  this 
point  is  immaterial  in  the  present  connection.  By  carry- 
ing the  view  backward  to  the  extreme  limit,  and  try- 
ing to  represent  to  ourselves  how  a  creature  like  man 
would  have  lived  in  the  pre-stone  age  —  by  doing  this,  we 
are  able  to  set  the  total  results  of  human  progress  in 
bolder  relief  against  the  background  of  nature,  and  hence 
to  obtain  clearer  inital  conceptions  of  our  subject.  The 
principle  to  be  developed  is  the  same  whether  we  begin 
with  man  in  the  primitive  stone  age,  or  in  the  earlier  time 
that  preceded  the  first  era  of  material  progress. 

29 


30  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

§  6.  —  Great  social  bodies  were  impossible  in  early 
prehistoric  times  for  at  least  two  good  reasons : 

First  —  the  precarious  food  supply  which  is  always 
offered  by   uncultivated  nature; 

Second  —  human  ignorance  about  how  to  make  ar- 
tificial use  of  nature. 

Under  such  conditions  it  was  plainly  impossible  for 
large  numbers  to  associate  in  one  locality.  On  this  point 
we  may  cite  some  interesting  observations  by  Mr.  Lewis 
Morgan,  a  careful  student  of  Indian  life,  who  was  adopted 
into  the  Seneca  tribe.  The  passage  to  be  reproduced  re- 
fers to  a  higher  plane  of  existence  than  is  here  to  be  con- 
sidered; but  for  that  reason  it  applies  with  even  more 
force. 

"Numbers  within  a  given  area  were  limited  by  the 
amount  of  subsistence  it  afforded.  When  fish  and  game 
were  the  main  reliance  for  food,  it  required  an  immense 
area  to  maintain  a  small  tribe.  After  farinaceous  food  was 
added  to  fish  and  game,  the  area  occupied  by  a  tribe  was 
still  a  large  one  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  the  people. 
New  York,  with  its  forty-seven  thousand  square  miles, 
never  contained  at  any  time  more  than  twenty-five  thous- 
and Indians,  including  with  the  Iroquois  the  Algonkins 
on  the  east  side  of  the  Hudson  and  upon  Long  Island,  and 
the  Eries  and  Neutral  Nation  in  the  western  section  of  the 
«tate"   (1). 

The  conditions  which  underlay  the  dispersal  of  the 
Indians  over  a  wide  territory  applied  with  far  more  force 
to  primeval  men,  who  had  made  little  or  no  material  pro- 
gress. It  was  necessarily  impossible  for  large  social 
groups  to  be  formed  in  the  early  prehistoric  age,  since  the 
food  supply  was  precarious  and  the  material  arts  were 
unknown. 

§  7.  —  But  while  we  are  sure  that  primeval  men  must 
have  been  widely  scattered,  it  is  absolutely  certain  that  a 
small  measure  of  association  obtained  among  them.  The 
profound  significance  of  kinship  ties  in  the  early  history  of 
all  races  proves  that  early  social  connections  must  have 


THE  PRIMITIVE  STRUGGLE   FOR  EXISTENCE.  31 

been  based,  not  on  the  accidental  association  of  individu- 
als, but  mostly  on  some  form  of  blood-relationship.  The 
testimony  of  history  and  ethnology  is  reenforced  by  that  of 
animal  and  human  physiology.  The  care  of  the  young  was 
at  least  as  necessary  among  primeval  men  as  it  is  with  the 
higher  animals;  and  as  a  matter  of  logical  inference  it 
was  even  more  necessary.  This  fact,  of  course,  involved  a 
family  life  of  some  kind.  Wholly  aside  from  such  a  con- 
sideration, the  advantages  of  a  limited  cooperation  for  de- 
fense and  offense  could  not  fail  to  be  manifest.  The  earli- 
est social  ties  known  to  man,  then,  were  those  of  the  pre- 
historic family  group.  These  groups  would  naturally  hold 
together  up  to  the  point  permitted  by  the  available  food 
supply. 

§  8.  —  The  earliest  records  and  traditions  of  all  civ- 
ilized races  tell  of  great  migratory  movements;  and  sav- 
ages and  barbarians  at  the  present  day  roam  over  the 
territories  whereon  they  live.  It  is  plain  that  the  small, 
scattered  groups  of  primitive  men  already  spoken  of  could 
not,  as  a  rule,  remain  permanently  upon  one  spot.  Ig- 
norant of  the  material  arts,  and  dependent  upon  the  pre- 
carious gifts  of  uncultivated  nature,  they  must  have  been 
forced  into  the  nomadic  life,  restlessly  wandering  about 
in  search  of  food. 

§  9.  —  The  early  records  and  traditions  of  all  civi- 
lized peoples  tell  not  only  of  migrations  but  of  conflicts 
which,  in  last  analysis,  resolve  themselves  into  struggles 
about  the  food  supply.  The  facts  of  savage  life  tell  the 
same  story.  Prehistoric  social  groups  must,  therefore, 
have  been  under  the  necessity  of  contending  with  each 
other  and  with  the  lower  animals  for  the  means  of  sub- 
sistence. 

We  know  that  natural  goods,  like  water,  fruit,  and 
game,  are  not  equally  distributed  over  the  earth  at  the 
present  time;  and  that,  simply  on  what  we  call  "the  law 
of  chances,"  they  have  never  been  everywhere  the  same. 
Consequently  the  food  supply  was  not  equally  distributed 
over  the  earth  in  prehistoric  times.    The  effect  of  this  in- 


32  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

equality  upon  primitive  men  was  increased  by  those  in- 
evitable variations  in  the  environment  which  cause  a 
drouth  here,  and  a  flood  there;  an  unusual  quickening  of 
vegetable  and  animal  life  in  one  region,  and  a  blight  some- 
where else.  Thus  it  could  not  but  happen  that  while  some 
primitive  groups  were  finding  enough  to  sustain  life, 
others  were  obtaining  little  or  no  subsistence  in  their  ac- 
customed haunts ;  and  it  is  easy  to  see  that  these  natural 
inequalities,  together  with  human  ignorance  about  the  ma- 
terial arts,  were  at  the  basis  of  primeval  warfare. 

§  10.  —  The  issue  of  a  conflict  between  two  groups 
over  the  possession  of  an  oasis  that  would  accomodate  but 
one  group  was  necessarily,  as  a  rule,  the  extermination 
of  the  vanquished  by  the  victors. 

If  a  group  obtained  food  enough  to  support  its  mem- 
bers there  was  little  or  no  cause  for  serious  internal  con- 
tention. All  strength  would  be  reserved  for  coping  with 
outsiders.  But  even  the  condition  of  internal  peace  could 
not  have  been  steadily  maintained.  Famines,  as  we  know, 
have  persisted  far  into  historical  times ;  they  are  known  to- 
day among  the  more  backward  races ;  and  it  is  not  difficult 
to  form  some  conception  of  the  effects  of  a  prehistoric 
famine.  At  such  melancholy  times  the  stress  of  the  strug- 
gle for  life  must  have  broken  the  bonds  that  held  the 
primitive  group  together.  Civilized  men,  crazed  by  hun- 
ger, have  been  known  to  resort  to  cannibalism;  savages 
more  quickly  do  the  same;  and  we  may  be  sure  that  early 
prehistoric  men  were  no  better  than  savages. 

§  11.  —  These  conclusions  may  profitably  be  set  along- 
side some  concrete  pictures  of  the  lowest  savages 
at  present  living  in  the  world.  We  cite  first  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Darwin,  whose  five  years'  travels 
are  recorded  in  his  "Journal  of  Researches."  We 
should  notice  particularly  that  the  people  described 
are  scattered  and  nomadic;  that  they  are  very  ig- 
norant of  the  material  arts;  that  the  groups  are  often 
compelled  to  fight  among  themselves ;  that  these  fights  are 
in  relation  to  the  food  supply;   and  that  scarcity  of  food 


THE   PRIMITIVE   STRUGGLE   FOR  EXISTENCE.  33 

leads  to  cannibalism.     The  passages  quoted  refer  to  the 
Fuegians  of  South  America. 

"While  going  one  day  on  shore  near  Wollaston  Is- 
land, we  pulled  alongside  a  canoe  with  six  Fuegians. 
These  were  the  most  abject  and  miserable  creatures  I  any- 
where beheld.  .  .  .  These  poor  wretches  were  stunted 
in  their  growth,  their  hideous  faces  bedaubed  with  white 
paint,  their  skins  filthy  and  greasy,  their  hair  entangled, 
their  voices  discordant,  and  their  gestures  violent.  .  . 
At  night,  five  or  six  human  beings,  naked  and  scarcely  pro- 
tected from  the  wind  and  rain  of  this  tempestuous  climate, 
sleep  on  the  wet  ground  coiled  up  like  animals.  When- 
ever it  is  low  water,  winter  or  summer,  night  or  day,  they 
must  rise  to  pick  shell  fish  from  the  rocks ;  and  the  women 
either  dive  to  collect  sea-eggs,  or  sit  patiently  in  their 
canoes,  and  with  a  baited  hair-line  without  any  hook,  jerk 
out  little  fish.  If  a  seal  is  killed,  or  the  fioating  carcass 
of  a  putrid  whale  discovered,  it  is  a  feast;  and  such  mis- 
erable food  is  assisted  by  a  few  tasteless  berries  and  fungi. 

They  often  suffer  from  famine:  I  heard  Mr.  Low, 
a  sealing  master  intimately  acquainted  with  the  natives 
of  this  country,  give  a  curious  account  of  the  state  of  a 
party  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  natives  on  the  west  coast, 
who  were  very  thin  and  in  great  distress.  A  succession  of 
gales  prevented  the  women  from  getting  shell-fish  on  the 
rocks,  and  they  could  not  go  out  in  their  canoes  to  catch 
seal.  A  small  party  of  these  men  one  morning  set  out^ 
and  the  other  Indians  explained  to  him  that  they  were  go- 
ing on  a  four  days'  journey  for  food;  on  their  return  Low 
went  to  meet  them,  and  he  found  them  excessively  tired, 
each  man  carrying  a  great  square  piece  of  putrid  whale 
blubber  with  a  hole  in  the  middle,  through  which  they 
put  their  heads.  ...  As  soon  as  the  blubber  was 
brought  into  a  wigwam,  an  old  man  cut  off  thin  slices, 
and  muttering  over  them,  broiled  them  for  a  minute,  and 
distributed  them  to  the  famished  party,  who  during  this 
time  preserved  a  profound  silence.     .     .     .     The  different 

3 


34  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

tribes  when  at  war  are  cannibals.  From  the  concurrent, 
but  quite  independent  evidence  of  the  boy  taken  by  Mr, 
Low,  and  of  Jemmy  Button  [a  Fuegian,  who  had  been 
taken  by  the  Darwin  party,  and  had  learned  some  Eng- 
lish], it  is  certainly  true,  that  when  pressed  in  winter  by 
hunger,  they  kill  and  devour  their  old  women  before  they 
kill  their  dogs ;  the  boy  being  asked  by  Mr.  Low  why  they 
did  this,  answered,  "Doggies  catch  otters,  old  women  no." 
[That  is,  the  dogs  were  more  useful  than  the  old  women, 
and  hence  were  spared  longer].  .  .  .  Horrid  as  such  a 
death  at  the  hands  of  their  friends  and  relatives  must  be, 
the  fears  of  the  old  women,  when  hunger  begins  to  press, 
are  more  painful  to  think  of;  we  are  told  that  they  then 
often  run  away  into  the  mountains,  but  that  they  are  pur- 
sued by  the  men,  and  brought  back  to  the  slaughter-house 
at  their  own  firesides.     .     .     . 

The  different  tribes  have  no  government  or  chief;  yet 
each  is  surrounded  by  other  hostile  tribes,  speaking  differ- 
ent dialects,  and  separated  from  each  other  by  a  deserted 
border  of  neutral  territory:  the  cause  of  their  Avarfare 
appears  to  be  the  means  of  subsistence.  Their  country 
is  a  broken  mass  of  wild  rocks,  lofty  hills,  and  useless 
forests;  and  these  are  viewed  through  mists  and  endless 
storms.  The  habitable  land  is  reduced  to  the  stones  on 
the  beach;  in  search  of  food  they  are  compelled  unceas- 
ingly to  wander  from  spot  to  spot,  and  so  steep  is 
the  coast  that  they  can  only  move  about  in  their  wretched 
canoes.     .     .     . 

The  perfect  equality  among  the  individuals  compos- 
ing the  Fuegian  tribes  must  for  a  long  time  retard  their 

civilization At  present,  even  a  piece  of  cloth 

given  to  one  is  torn  into  shreds  and  distributed;  and  no 
one  individual  becomes  richer  than  another.  ...  I 
believe,  in  this  extreme  part  of  South  America,  man  ex- 
ists in  a  lower  state  of  improvement  than  in  any  other 
part  of  the  world"   (2). 

Crossing  the  South  Pacific  Ocean  into  Australia,  we 
find  savage  tribes  but  little  more  advanced  in  culture  than 


THE   PRIMITIVE   STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE.  35 

the  Fuegians.    We  cite  now  from  Professor  KatzePs  work 
on  the  races  of  mankind. 

"It  is  impossible  to  understand  the  Australians  apart 
from  their  extensive  nomadism,  to  which  all  the  natural 
qualities  of  the  land  contribute.    At  the  bottom  of  it  lies 
the  deficiency  of  water,  and  the  unequal  distribution  of 
food,  plants,  and  animals  which  partly  results  from  this. 
The  dry  season  causes  a  large  number  of  places  otherwise 
favorable  to  habitation   to  be  simply  impossible.      But 
since,  owing  to  the  almost  total  absence  of  mountains  to 
feed  the  springs,  permanent  drought  is  no  less  great  than 
the  time  and  amount  of  rainfall  are  incalculable,  there  are 
few  permanent  oases,  and  the  arrivals  of  damp  monsoons, 
few  and  far  between  as  they  are,  are  an  insufficient  check 
to  nomadism.    Vegetable  food-stuffs  are  often  to  be  sought 
for  at  great  distances,  while  animals  avoid  the  dry  regions 
almost  as  much  as  men.    Thus  the  lack  of  mountains  and 
large  rivers  over  the  largest  part  of  the  country  makes 
for  migration,  and  if  we  further  regard  its  isolated  posi- 
tion, the  conditions  of  Australia  are  as  unfavorable  as  we 
can  conceive  for  the  development  of  a  settled  population. 
Thus  the  nomad  tribes  of  the  west  go  about,  the  men  with 
their  weapons  in  front,  the  women  with  the  baggage  and 
children  in  the  rear.     .     .     .     The  length  of  stay  depends 
upon  the  quantity  of  food,  water,  and  other  conveniences ; 
but  even  so  they  seldom  remain  in  one  place  longer  than  a 
fortnight,  owing  to  the  pressure  exerted  by  other  groups. 
.     .     .     One  can  hardly  speak  of  agriculture  among  the 
Australians,  only  traces  of  it  have  been  observed.     .     . 
The  prohibition  to  dig  up  seed-bearing  food-plants  after 
the  flowering  is  merely  the  necessary  result  of  ever-immi- 
nent famine.    It  is  a  long  step  from  this  to  their  preserva- 
tion and  increase  by  cultivation.     .     .     .     The  life  of  the 
Australian  native  afforded  little  room  for  industrial  ac- 
tivity.    .     .     .     Infanticide  was  and  is  very  widespread, 
and  in  any  case  the  number  of  births  is  out  of  all  propor- 
tion to  that  of  the  children  who  survive.     .     .     .     Nature 
being  for  the  most  part  unpropitious,  renders  dispersion 


36  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

compulsory ;  but,  at  the  same  time,  knits  the  bonds  of  the 
family  group  closer.  This  favors  a  high  degree  of  isola- 
tion, which  imparts  to  the  life  of  a  community  a  repub- 
lican or  quasi-federative  character.  Every  family  group 
has  its  elective  chief   (3). 

These  quotations  could  be  multiplied  indefinitely. 
Study  of  the  most  primitive  races  now  living  in  the  world 
carries  us  far  back  to  what  must  have  been  the  condition 
of  early  prehistoric  men  generally. 

§  12.  —  A  favorite  line  of  thought  with  those  who  lean 
toward  one  style  of  theological  reasoning  is,  that  a  kind 
Providence  fitted  the  earth  for  man,  and  that  each  indi- 
vidual has  but  to  take  his  seat  at  "the  Father's  table." 
Thus,  Mr.  Henry  George  compares  the  earth  to  an  ocean 
steamship  wiiich  has  been  amply  stocked  with  food  for 
its  long  voyage. 

But  it  needs  to  be  emphasized  at  the  outset  that  men 
have  not  grown  up  in  a  physically  hospitable  world.  The 
comparison  of  the  earth  to  a  steamship  on  which  all  the 
passengers  have  easy  access  to  all  the  food,  clothing,  and 
shelter  they  need  is  too  far  fetched;  and  this  line  of 
thought  cannot  help  theology  in  the  end.  Primeval  men 
had  certain  physical  needs;  and  the  earth,  like  a  well- 
stocked  ocean  steamship,  undoubtedly  contained  enough 
and  more  than  enough,  in  some  form,  to  satisfy  all  the 
needs  of  w^hich  its  "passengers''  were  conscious.  But 
these  ancestors  of  ours  possessed  neither  the  knowledge, 
the  vast  material  outfit,  nor  the  wide  social  organization 
and  cooperative  training  necessary  to  the  development  of 
the  resources  of  nature.  And  thus,  although  the  earth's 
resources  were  ample  in  themselves,  yet,  relatively  to  man, 
these  same  resources  were  limited.  Practically  speaking, 
so  far  as  primitive  man  was  concerned,  most  of  these 
abundant  natural  goods  might  as  well  have  been  located 
on  the  moon. 

§  13.  —  Summarizing  the  results  of  the  studies  illus- 
trated by  this  chapter,  the  following  propositions  may  be 
laid  down  as  having  the  sanction  of  science : 


THE  PRIMITIVE  STRUGGLE  FOR  EXISTENCE.  37 

Men  were  once  ignorant  of  the  material  arts. 

Nature,  untouched  by  the  hand  of  art,  yields  an  uncer- 
tain subsistence  alike  to  man  and  beast. 

As  a  rule,  early  prehistoric  men  lived  in  small,  scat- 
tered, family  groups. 

These  primitive  groups  were  nomadic. 

The  conditions  of  existence  necessarily  brought  prim- 
itive groups  into  hostile  collision  with  each  other  and  with 
the  lower  animals. 

The  essence  of  these  propositions  can  be  expressed  in 
a  single  sentence  as  follows:  Men  once  lived  an  animal 
life,  scattered  over  the  earth  in  small  wandering  groups, 
depending  for  food  upon  a  precarious  natural  supply,  and 
fighting  with  the  lower  animals  and  with  each  other  for 
the  means  of  existence. 

Against  the  dark  background  of  the  primeval  world 
looms  the  great  process  of  social  evolution  whose  begin- 
nings we  shall  study  in  the  next  chapter. 

(1)— Morgan,  Ancient  Society,  (N.  Y.,  1878),  p.  111. 

(2) — Darwin,  Journal  of  Researches  (London,  1894.  Ward,  Lock, 
and  Bowden),  pp.  213,  214,  215,  228.  Cf.  Ratzel,  History  of  Mankind 
(London,  1897.     Butler's  trans.),  II,  p.  84ff. 

(3)— Idem  (London,  1896),  I,  pp.  347,  348,  363,  365,  377. 


CHAPTER  III. 


PREHISTORIC  BEGINNINGS. 


§  14.  —  Eising  slowly  above  the  animal  condition,  men 
learned  how  to  fashion  rough  tools  of  wood  and  stone, 
then  utensils  of  polished  stone  and  more  carefully  pre- 
pared wood,  and  at  length  implements  of  metal.  Mean- 
while they  became  expert  in  hunting  and  fishing,  acquired 
the  use  of  fire,  and  domesticated  some  of  the  lower  ani- 
mals. Before  the  dawn  of  history,  men  also  learned  to 
save  seeds  for  planting,  and  thus  laid  the  foundations  of 
agriculture. 

§  15.  —  In  studying  the  primitive  struggle  for  exist- 
ence we  saw  that,  simply  on  what  we  call  "the  law  of 
chances,"  natural  advantages  were  unequally  distributed 
over  the  world  in  prehistoric  times,  just  as  they  have  been 
during  all  history,  and  just  as  they  are  today.  Moreover, 
we  saw  that  this  unequal  distribution  of  natural  goods 
was  necessarily  at  the  root  of  much  prehistoric  warfare. 
Bearing  these  considerations  in  mind,  we  must  now  ob- 
serve the  effects  of  early  material  progress  in  the  midst 
of  the  primitive  struggle  for  existence. 

Throughout  all  recorded  history  mankind  have  not 
everywhere  achieved  progress  in  the  material  arts  at  the 
same  rate.  Some  have  shot  ahead ;  and  some  have  lagged 
far  behind.  In  harmony  with  these  facts,  and  simply  on 
what  we  call  "the  law  of  chances,"  we  know  that  the  be- 
ginnings —  the  prehistoric  steps  —  of  material  progress 
could  not  have  been  equal  the  world  over.  Primitive 
groups  in  one  region  advanced  more  rapidly  in  the  arts 
than  those  in  another.    One  of  the  first  effects  of  material 

38 


PREHISTORIC   BEGINNINGS.    .  39 

progress  Avas,  therefore,  to  make  more  conspicuous  the 
prior  inequality  of  natural  conditions. 

This  increased  inequality  operated,  in  turn,  to  in- 
crease the  range  and  extent  of  warfare.  The  less  fortunate 
would  inevitably  combine,  and  press  upon  the  more  for- 
tunate in  the  proportion  that  differences  obtained  between 
their  material  conditions. 

But  while  progress  thus  increased  the  total  amount  of 
warfare,  it  paradoxically  operated  at  the  same  time  to 
increase  the  sum  total  of  peace.  For,  although  it  intensi- 
fied the  competition  between  groups,  it  secured,  by  the  in- 
creased food  supply,  the  enlargement  of  all  groups  through 
the  affiliation  of  smaller  gToups  and  the  reduction  of  in- 
fanticide. The  number  living  at  peace  with  each  other 
within  group  limits  was  thus  greater,  even  though  the 
groups  themselves  were  more  liable  to  war  than  their 
earlier  and  smaller  predecessors. 

Material  progress,  then,  — 

Increased  the  inequalities  naturally  obtaining  be- 
tween social  groups;   and  thus  — 

Increased  the  range  and  extent  of  warfare;  but  at 
the  same  time  — 

Increased  the  sum  total  of  peace  by  providing  an  eco- 
nomic basis  for  the  affiliation  of  smaller  groups  and  the 
reduction  of  infanticide. 

§  16.  —  But  in  a  still  profounder  and  more  dramatic 
way  did  material  progress  change  the  direction  of  the 
forces  operating  upon  mankind.  Primeval  warfare  was  a 
struggle  for  extermination;  but  material  progress  gradu- 
ally transformed  war  into  a  struggle  for  domination.  Let 
us  carefully  notice  the  situation  here  developing,  for  it 
carries  us  upward,  by  a  direct  and  simple  route,  through 
the  darkness  of  prehistoric  times  into  the  light  of  ancient 
history. 

Progress  in  the  material  arts  endowed  labor  with  the 
power  of  producing  a  surplus  over  immediate  needs.  In 
fights,  the  victors,  instead  of  slaughtering  the  vanquished 
indiscriminately,  as  hitherto,  now  began  to  spare  life,  and 


40  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

to  enslave  the  vanquished.  Along  with  the  rise  of  slavery 
came  the  rise  of  a  ruling  and  owning  class  —  for  the  one 
implies  the  other.  In  the  struggle  for  existence  —  in  the 
struggle  for  good  locations  —  the  larger,  better  organized, 
and  more  powerful  groups  conquered  and  absorbed  the 
smaller,  thus  producing  tribal  societies  with  an  upper 
layer  of  free  families  and  a  lower  stratum  of  slaves.  At 
length,  in  place  of  small  groups  and  tribes,  there  began  to 
appear  social  bodies  of  national  dignity,  composed  of  as- 
sociated tribes,  permanently  settled  in  favored  regions  like 
the  valleys  of  the  Nile,  the  Tigris,  and  the  Euphrates; 
and  the  curtain  had  rolled  up  on  the  stage  of  history. 
The  ancient  civilizations  come  forward  through  the  haze 
of  myth  and  legend,  out  of  the  darkness  of  prehistoric 
times,  with  all  the  marks  of  their  earlier  history  strong 
upon  them.  They  are  in  possession  of  rude  industrial  sys- 
tems ;  they  are  engaged  in  wars  of  defense  and  conquest ; 
and  they  are  stratified  into  two  principal  classes,  whereof 
the  lower  is  the  property  of  the  upper,  in  substance  if  not 
always  in  form. 

Material  progress,  then,  issued  not  only  in  the  en- 
largement of  competitive  groups,  but  in  the  stratifica- 
tion, or  cleavage,  of  these  groups  primarily  on  the  basis 
of  human  slavery.* 

§  17.  —  In  illustration  of  some  of  these  propositions 
about  slavery  we  draw  again  upon  the  great  work  of  Rat- 
zel,   which  authoritatively  describes  the  many  races  of 

*  The  essential  fact  to  be  noted  here  is  simply  the  stratification,  or 
cleavage,  of  enlarging  social  groups.  A  correspondent  has  suggested 
that  we  do  not  make  it  quite  clear  just  how  cleavage  is  brought  about. 
We  are  not  so  particular  just  here  to  show  how  cleavage  is  produced, 
as  to  throw  the  fact  of  cleavage  itself  into  relief.  We  have  observed 
in  the  text  that  material  progress  endowed  labor  with  the  power  of 
producing  a  surplus  over  immediate  needs,  and  so  led  to  the  replace- 
ment of  indiscriminate  slaughter  by  capture  and  slavery.  This  is  the 
most  abstract  possible  statement  of  the  case.  The  concrete  involutions 
are  not  necessarily  so  simple  as  the  abstract  statement  seems  to  indi- 
cate. The  reader  should  notice  this  in  the  course  of  our  survey  of  the 
historic  civilizations. 


PREHISTORIC  BEGINNINGS.  41 

which  it  treats.  The  passages  reproduced  relate  to  soci- 
eties below  the  plane  of  modern  civilization  and  yet  above 
the  level  of  the  Fuegians  and  Australians  noticed  in  the 
preceding  chapter.  We  feel  like  apologizing  for  introduc- 
ing so  much  quoted  matter  in  connection  with  this  point ; 
but,  for  the  general  reader  at  least,  it  will  be  well  to  read 
the  passages  carefully. 

"The  Masai  in  East  Africa,  a  shepherd  tribe,  who  sub- 
sist upon  herds  of  a  fixed  size,  and  have  neither  labor  nor 
provisions  to  spare  for  slaves,  kill  their  prisoners  [of  war] 
their  neighbors,  the  agricultural  and  trading  Wakamba 
being  able  to  find  a  use  for  slaves,  do  not  kill  them     (1) 

Nearly  allied  to  slaves  are  those  despised  and  de 
graded  portions  of  the  population,  who  live  as  a  sharply 
separated  and  deep-lying  stratum,  under  a  conquering 
race.  Almost  every  race  in  Asia  or  Africa  which  has 
made  any  progress  toward  higher  development  embraces 
some  such,  not  always  differing  ethnologically.  For  that 
very  reason,  however,  the  social  difference  is  all  the  more 
strictly  maintained.     .     .     .     "   (2). 

In  such  cases  cleavage  into  upper  and  lower  strata 
is  based  upon  something  more  than  property  right  in  the 
laborers  themselves.  Just  here,  however,  it  is  sufficient 
for  the  point  that  we  are  trying  to  make,  to  keep  the  at- 
tention focused  upon  slavery,  in  order  to  simplify  the  dis- 
cussion as  much  as  possible. 

"Slavery,  which  has  not  much  hold  among  the  simpler 
[Malay]  races,  is  strongly  developed  among  the  "town  Ma- 
lays" of  Palembang,  Acheen,  and  the  like.  [Note  here 
again  that  the  more  primitive  are  not  so  fully  stratified 
into  classes].  It  affects  prisoners  of  war,  malefactors  who 
eannot  pay  their  fines,  and  other  debtors,  among  them  not 
a  few  Avho  have  gambled  away  their  liberty.  .  .  .  Ille- 
gitimate children,  whether  the  parents  are  free  or  slaves 
come  into  this  class.  As  a  rule,  slaves  are  treated  as  mem- 
bers of  the  household,  can  buy  their  freedom,  and  in  prac- 
tice are  not  inferior  to  poor  relations  who  have  been  taken 
into  the  house  for  the  worth  of  their  service     (3). 


42  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

Class-divisions  among  the  Polynesians  are,  by  reason 
of  taboo,  as  sharp  as  in  the  most  thorough  system  of  caste. 
They  fall  into  those  which  participate  in  the  divine,  and 
those  who  are  wholly  excluded  from  it.  The  aristocratic 
principle  is  seldom  carried  to  such  an  extreme  as  here, 
where  a  stern  psychology  remains  inexorable  even  beyond 
the  grave.  In  Tonga  the  native  people,  in  contradistic- 
tion  to  the  immigrant  nobles,  are  regarded  as  having  no 
immortal  souls;  while  the  souls  of  nobles  return  from 
the  next  world  and  inspire  those  of  their  own  order  for 
the  priesthood,  so  that  the  connection  of  the  tabooed  [i.  e, 
the  upper]  class  with  the  gods  is  never  interrupted.  The 
boundary  between  these  two  classes  is  not  everywhere 
alike,  though  the  division  into  chiefs,  freemen,  or  slaves 
runs  through  all  Polynesia.  ...  Of  the  men  of  rank 
the  greater  number  are  connected  by  ties  of  relationship, 
the  memory  of  which  is  preserved  by  professed  genealog- 
ists, with  the  aid  of  pedigree  sticks.  The  remembrance 
goes  far  back.  When  the  palace  in  Hawaii  was  dedicated 
none  were  admitted  save  those  who  were  connected  with 
the  sovereign  in  the  tenth  or  some  less  degree.     .     .     . 

In  Micronesia,  the  division  into  classes  is  equally  into 
nobles,  freemen,  and  slaves.  The  first  [i.  e,  the  nobles], 
with  the  priests,  are  the  most  influential.     .     .     . 

In  East  Melanesia  the  classes  correspond  with  the 
Polynesian  divisions.     .     .     .     (4). 

Society  among  the  Hovas  [in  the  large  island  of  Mad- 
agascar, east  of  Africa]  falls  into  three  classes;  the 
nobles,  the  citizens,  and  the  slaves.  The  nobility  consists 
mostly  of  the  descendants  of  former  chiefs.  ...  Of 
slaves  three  kinds  are  distinguished.  .  .  .  The  first 
are  of  the  same  blood  as  the  Hovas.  .  .  .  The  most 
numerous  class  are  recruited  chiefly  from  prisoners  of 
war;  they  are  slaves  in  the  strictest  sense.  .  .  .  The 
third  class  are  Africans,  imported  by  Arabs  mostly  from 
the  Mozambique  coast.  Since  1877  the  slaves  have  been 
nominally  [but  not  actually]  free  in  all  parts  of  the  island 
over  which  the  Hova  power  extends.     The  slaves  hold  a 


PREHISTORIC   BEGINNINGS.  45 

somewhat  lower  position  than  the  other  members  of  the 
family ;  but  may,  by  the  good  will  of  their  masters,  lead  an 
existence  that  many  a  free  man  would  envy.     .     .     . 

The  Hovas  have  become  great  by  the  power  of  the 
sword,  and  hold  their  power  thereby.     .     .     .     (5). 

In  no  part  of  the  earth  has  slavery  attained  such 
vast  importance  as  in  Africa.  ...  Its  chief  source  is 
capture  in  war.  .  .  .  Every  man  bears  a  chain  of  some 
sort.     It  is  only  chiefs'  children  who  are  not  liable  to 

slavery Beside  the  slaves  whom  the  Duallas 

put  to  live  in  separate  villages  of  their  own,  as  on  the 
Mungo,  and  who  attend  to  agriculture,  and  apart  from 
their  own  w^ant  of  freedom  are  only  a  little  worse  off  than 
their  masters,  one  thinks  involuntarily  of  the  oasis  dwel- 
lers  of  the  Central  Sahara,  subjugated  by  Tipoo,  who  tend 
their  lords'  date-orchards  and  share  the  produce  with 
them.     .     .     . 

The  southern  basin  of  the  Congo  in  its  interior  part 
being  a  part  of  Africa  as  little  touched  as  any  by  European 
influences,  the  observations  which  have  there  been  made 
in  great  number  upon  slavery  and  the  slave-trade  are  of 
double  interest.  Slavery  is  beyond  question  universal 
there.  Even  in  the  Portuguese  possessions,  where  it  is 
formally  abolished,  it  survives;  and  the  ^working  classes' 
are  still,  as  of  old,  recruited  by  the  purchase  of  negroes 
by  preference  from  Mwata  Jamvo's  country.  From  the 
chief  slave  markets  .  .  .  only  a  few  years  ago  thous- 
ands were  going  westward  across  the  Kasai;  and  among 
the  indigenous  races  the  Kiotos  and  Bangala  are  especially 
active  as  traders  and  leaders  of  slave-caravans.     .     .     (6). 

In  Southern  Arabia  a  separation  of  castes  has  grown 
up  of  quite  peculiar  sharpness.  .  .  .  As  in  other  Is- 
lamitic  countries,  a  distinction  is  made  into  Shereefs,  the 
alleged  descendants  of  the  prophet  [Mohammed],  then  rul- 
ing families,  then  Bedouins,  who,  being  fighters,  are  al- 
ways valued  more  highly  than  the  sedentary  peasant  popu- 
lation. Besides  these  there  are  the  Akhdams,  a  term  best 
rendered  by   ^disreputable  classes.'     Many  industries  are 


44  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 


despised  by  the  haughty  Bedouins,  and  these  the  Akhdams 
carry  on.  They  are  tanners,  washermen,  potters,  butchers, 
and  are  therefore  looked  upon  as  tainted,  though  not  so 
impure  as  to  communicate  impurity  to  the  objects  that 
have  passed  through  their  hands     (7). 

The  social  organization  of  Further  India  is  not  so 
elaborately  bureaucratic  as  that  of  China.  The  great  im- 
portance of  the  nobility  reminds  us  of  Japan;  and  in 
Cambodia  and  Burmah  we  have  Indian  institutions,  of 
which  there  is  also  a  glimmer  in  Siam.  In  Cambodia  the 
royal  family  stand  in  the  first  class,  almost  a  caste ;  in  the 
second  are  the  descendants  of  the  old  kings  of  the  country. 
Third  come  the  preams,  the  Brahmins  of  India,  and  fourth, 
the  servants  of  Buddha.  The  lowest  place  is  held  by  the 
laboring  population,  husbandmen,  fishermen,  artisans, 
shop-keepers.  These  are  nominally  free,  but  have  to  ren- 
der service  to  a  lord  and  most  liberally  to  the  state.  In  ad- 
dition there  are  the  slaves,  especially  numerous  in  Siam 
and  in  Cambodia,  in  whose  ranks  is  much  of  the  best 
labor-power  in  the  country"    (8). 

§  18.  —  Thus  we  see  that  slavery,  or  property  in  men, 
is  today  found  ever}' where  among  races  that  have  climbed 
above  the  lower  planes  of  savagery,  while  falling  short  of 
the  levels  of  civilization.  It  does  not  now  exist,  at  least 
in  outward  form,  in  the  highly  progressive  modern  coun- 
tries like  Germany,  France,  England,  the  United  States, 
and  the  other  parts  of  western  society.  But  it  once  pre- 
vailed among  the  forefathers  of  these  peoples ;  and  as  we 
have  already  observed,  it  was  universal  in  the  ancient  clas- 
sic and  oriental  civilizations.  Before  the  prehistoric  be- 
ginnings of  material  progress,  property  in  men  was  not  a 
factor  in  human  life.  In  the  preceding  chapter,  for  in- 
stance, we  saw  that  it  did  not  prevail  among  the  ex- 
tremely backward  Fuegians.  The  prime  condition  of 
slavery  is,  that  labor  be  able  artificially  to  produce  more 
than  enough  for  immediate  necessities.  When  a  surplus 
appears,  along  with  the  early  steps  of  progress  in  the  arts, 
then  slavery  inevitably  follows.     The  institution  of  pro- 


PREHISTORIC   BEGINNINGS.  4& 

perty  right  in  men  originates  in  the  stage  of  nomadic 
barbarism;  and  it  continues  in  the  life  of  settled  races 
until  their  social  development  passes  into  higher  stages.* 
§  19.  —  We  do  not  stop  just  here  to  inquire  into  the 
moral  aspects  or  the  general  significance  of  property  right 
in  human  beings,  or  any  kind  of  property  right  by  which 
an  upper  class  is  able  to  exploit  a  lower  class  without  re- 
turning a  direct  economic  recompense.  In  the  present 
connection  we  are  concerned,  most  of  all,  to  emphasize 
the  inevitableness  of  property  right  in  surplus-producing 
labor  at  a  certain  point  in  social  development.  This  insti- 
tution is  just  as  inevitable  in  the  earlier  stages  of  social 
evolution  as  the  precipitation  of  rain  when  atmospheric 
conditions  are  favorable  to  it.  The  ancient  civilizations, 
with  their  universal  slavery,  were  oases  in  the  midst  of 
deserts  of  savagery  and  barbarism.  The  history  of  every 
ancient  society  records  the  presence  of  outside  barbarisms 
with  which  it  sooner  or  later  came  into  contact,  and 
against  which  it  was  compelled  to  undertake  defensive  and 
offensive  operations.  If  the  enslaved  classes  had  with- 
drawn from  the  ancient  civilizations,  and  established  an 
equality  and  liberty  such  as  that  prevailing  among  the 
lowest  savages  and  advocated  by  some  social  idealists,  the 
seceding  multitudes  would  have  retrograded  toward  the 
conditions  of  the  primitive  struggle  for  existence.  To  use 
a  homely  phrase,  they  would  have  jumped  out  of  the  fry- 

*  It  may  be  noted  here  that  the  so-called  "communism  in  land"  prac- 
ticed by  ancient  societies  —  oriental,  classic,  and  western  —  was  upper- 
class  communism.  Before  the  advance  of  material  progress  had  per- 
mitted men  to  increase  greatly  and  form  general  governments  there  was 
necessarily  a  large  amount  of  unused  land  around  every  community; 
and  this,  together  with  occupied  land,  was  at  first  regarded  as  the  com- 
mon property  of  the  free  upper  class.  When  population  increased,  and 
general  governments  were  established,  the  upper-class  communism  in  land 
passed  into  upper-class  individualism;  and  the  soil  was  appropriated  in 
severalty.  The  conquest  of  a  society  like  Anglo-Saxon  England,  living 
under  primitive  upper-class  communism,  looks,  to  the  superficial  modern 
eye,  as  if  it  were  the  subjection  of  Democracy  by  Aristocracy;  but  in 
reality  it  was  nothing  of  the  kind. 


46  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ing-pan  into  the  fire.  Collision  with  an  indefinite  number 
of  hostile  tribes  would  have  been  certain.  On  the  one 
hand,  the  seceders  might  have  been  conquered,  and  either 
exterminated  or  re-enslaved  by  new  masters.  Or,  on  the 
other  hand,  after  exterminating  a  few  tribes,  they  might 
have  acquired  some  good  territory  as  a  home.  But  if  the 
free  and  equal  seceders  had  the  good  fortune  to  go  as 
far  as  this,  their  troubles  would  not  have  been  ended. 
They  would  now  have  been  compelled  to  defend  their 
hardly  won  possessions  against  others  less  fortunate  than 
they.  These  hostile  tribes,  incessantly  attacking,  either 
singly  or  in  combination,  would  have  at  length  exhausted 
the  resources  of  our  ancient  democracy  and  enslaved  it. 
No  race  ever  could  nor  did  work  its  way  up  from  the  stone 
age  into  modern  civilization  on  the  basis  of  equality  and 
liberty.  It  would  have  been  simply  impossible  for  free 
societies  to  organize  the  progress  that  has  led  up  from  the 
early  prehistoric  age  through  the  oriental,  classic,  and 
western  civilizations  into  modern  democracy. 

§20.  —  The  beginnings  of  material  art  in  the  midst  of 
the  primitive  struggle  for  existence,  then,  — 
Increased  the  size  of  social  groups,  and  — 
Stratified  these  growing  aggregates  into  two  princi- 
pal classes  whose  relations  were  based  at  first  upon  the 
institution  of  slavery,  or  property  right  in  men. 

Our  survey  thus  far  has  disclosed  a  comparatively 
simple  story;   but  the  plot  now  thickens. 

(1)— Ratzel,  I,  p.  123. 

(2)— Idem,  I,  p.  124. 

(3)— Idem,  I,  pp.  446,  447.   . 

(4)— Idem,  I,  p.  280. 

(5)— Idem,  I,  pp.  464,  465,  467. 

(6)— Idem,  II,  pp.  348,  349. 

(7)— Idem,  III,  p.  220. 

(8) — Idem,  III,  pp.  424,  425.  —  On  slavery  and  serfdom  in  general, 
cf.  Spencer,  Principles  of  Sociology  (N.  Y.,  1895),  II,  pp.  290-310.  Idem 
(N.  Y.,  1897),  III,  pp.  464-492. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT. 


§  21.  —  It  is  well  understood  by  historical  students 
that  slavery  was  a  great  step  in  human  progress;  but 
whatever  its  merits  may  be,  the  consideration  of  slavery, 
or  the  institution  of  property  right  in  men,  introduces  a 
much  larger  subject. 

By  means  of  slavery  it  is  plain  that  an  upper  class 
appropriates  the  labor  products  and  services  of  a  lower 
class  without  engaging  to  make  repayment.  But  it  now 
becomes  exceedingly  important  to  emphasize  that  the  ap- 
propriation of  labor  products  on  this  one-sided  basis  is 
brought  about  by  other  institutions  than  that  of  property 
right  in  men.  For  instance,  if  a  class  engross  the  land 
of  a  country,  and  force  the  remainder  of  the  population  to 
pay  rent  for  the  use  of  the  soil,  such  a  procedure  issues, 
like  slavery,  in  the  absorption  of  labor  products  by  an 
upper  class  without  repayment. 

In  the  previous  chapter  we  learned  that  social  cleav- 
age arose  during  prehistoric  times,  while  society  was  yet 
in  the  stage  of  nomadic  barbarism.  Now,  if  we  examine 
the  field  of  history  carefully,  it  becomes  plain  that  one 
of  the  most  considerable  facts  not  only  of  the  ancient 
civilizations,  but  of  all  civilizations  down  to  the  present, 
is  just  this  cleavage,  or  stratification,  of  society  into  two 
principal  classes,  upper  and  lower.  It  matters  little  what 
legal  form  social  cleavage  may  take.  The  upper  class 
may  own  the  lower  class  bodily  —  in  which  case  we  have 
slavery,  pure  and  simple.  Or,  the  upper  class  may  own 
the  land  of  a  country,  the  lower  class  being  personally 
free,  but  compelled  to  pay  rent  to  the  landed  aristocracy. 

47 


48  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

Or,  there  may  be  a  combination  of  slavery  and  land  mo- 
nopoly, or  a  variation  of  either  of  these  in  the  direction 
of  "serfdom."  In  any  case  there  is  a  fundamental  cleav- 
age of  society  into  two  classes,  the  upper  appropriating 
the  labor  products  of  the  lower  without  engaging  to  make 
repayment.  The  form  of  the  fact  may  vary;  but  the 
essence,  or  substance,  of  exploitation  is  always  the  same. 
And  it  is  the  naked  fact  of  cleavage  in  abstraction  from 
all  forms  of  it  that  we  have  predicated  as  one  of  the  most 
considerable  facts  of  universal  history  down  to  the  pres- 
ent. If  the  point  is  not  immediately  apparent,  let  it  be  as- 
sumed while  we  turn  to  the  next  proposition. 

§  22.  —  We  have  seen  that  in  the  prehistoric  period, 
while  men  were  engaged  in  the  primitive  struggle  for 
existence,  they  were  necessarily  dispersed  over  wide  areas 
in  small,  more  or  less  hostile,  groups,  like  animals.  If 
we  could  rise  to  some  elevated  point,  and  take  a  bird's- 
eye  view  of  all  history,  we  should  see  that  one  of  the  most 
dramatic  features  of  social  development  consists  in  the  ex- 
pansion and  affiliation  of  these  little  groups  into  social 
bodies  of  continually  increasing  size.  Primitive  wan- 
dering, family  groups  have  been  gathered  into  nomadic 
tribes ;  tribes,  in  turn,  have  coalesced  into  settled  nations ; 
while  nations  have  been  gathered  into  great  civilized 
communities,  or  groups  of  nations. 

At  the  outset  of  this  great  process  of  social  aggrega- 
tion, or  integration,  imperative  necessities,  hitherto  non 
existent,  came  rapidly  to  the  front.  Men  were  beginning 
to  live  a  life  unlike  that  of  their  ancestors  before  the  age  of 
material  progress.  They  were  being  unconsciously  drawn 
together  into  expanding  social  systems  by  forces  they  little 
understood.  They  had  struck  out  along  the  upward  path 
of  civilization ;  and  as  the  old,  primitive  life  receded  into 
the  past,  they  were  confronted  by  a  tremendous  problem 
—  or,  perhaps  better,  by  a  number  of  problems  with  a  com- 
mon element.  These  problems  did  not  have  to  be  solved 
all  at  once;  but,  for  convenience,  we  will  enumerate  a 
number  of  them  together.    If  each  expanding  social  cor- 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT.       49 

poration  were  to  enjoy  internal  peace,  it  was  necessary 
that  the  most  certain  possible  food  supply  be  guaranteed 
for  the  largest  possible  number;  that  strongholds  be 
erected  and  equipped;  that  the  products  of  different  lo- 
calities be  exchanged;  that  calculations  be  made  and  ac- 
counts kept;  that  roads  be  constructed,  canals  dug,  and 
other  means  of  transportation  and  communication  by  land 
and  water  provided;  and  it  was  necessary,  too,  that  the 
religious  tendency  (which  was  at  first  complemental  to 
politics)  find  expression  through  the  establishment  of 
priesthoods  and  rituals  and  the  building  of  temples.  All 
these  and  other  necessities,  which  arose  at  various  peri- 
ods, resolve  themselves  in  last  analysis  into  a  general  de- 
mand for  large  and  increasing  quantities  of  labor  products 
which  take  the  form  of  capital.  The  drawing  together  of 
men  into  social  bodies  of  increasing  size  depends  largely 
upon  the  transformation  of  a  part  of  the  physical  world 
into  labor  products  which  are  not  immediately  consumed, 
but  which  are  transformed  into  the  various  kinds  of  capi- 
tal necessary  to  the  development  of  society. 

Looking  around  us  in  modern  society,  for  instance, 
it  is  plain  that  one  of  the  most  fundamental  conditions 
of  the  civilized  contact  of  large  numbers  of  people  is  the 
existence  of  capital,  vast  in  quantity  and  various  in  form. 
Eecur  for  a  moment  to  the  dispersed  condition  of  primi- 
tive men.  Then  consider  the  amazingly  close  physical 
and  intellectual  contact  of  people  in  modern  society: 
Farming  and  village  communities  outnumbering  in  the 
space  of  a  small  county  the  tribes  that  once  required  a 
territory  equal  to  New  York  State.  Towns  and  cities  con- 
taining their  thousands,  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  mil- 
lions. Nations  with  scores  of  millions,  peacefully  touch- 
ing borders  with  each  other.  A  great  civilization  bound 
together  by  vast  systems  of  transportation  and  communi- 
cation by  land  and  sea,  and  pulsing  with  the  currents  of 
a  universal  commerce  both  in  things  and  ideas.  There  is 
no  feature  of  this  great  social  system  that  cannot  be  shown 

4 


50  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

to   rest  immediatelj   and  vitally   upon   capital,   vast  in 
amount  and  various  in  kind. 

We  employ  the  term  ^^capitaF'  in  a  broad  sense,  "ma- 
terial" and  "spiritual."  Material  capital  is  physical  tools 
—  labor  products,  or  wealth  —  used  for  the  production  of 
still  more  wealth  from  the  earth's  resources.  Spiritual, 
or  intangible,  capital  is  order,  law,  social  organization, 
habits  of  cooperation  and  steady  work  on  the  part  of 
large  numbers,  general  and  special  scientific  and  literary 
knowledge,  etc.  In  order  to  project  the  idea  of  capital  into 
the  boldest  relief,  it  is  only  necessary  to  contrast  the  con- 
dition of  mankind  in,  say,  England  or  the  United 
States,  with  the  general  condition  of  mankind  under 
the  primitive,  animal  struggle  for  existence  as  out- 
lined in  a  previous  chapter.  Under  the  former 
condition,  men  were  set  off  like  animals  against 
unimproved  nature.  There  were  only  two  main  factors 
to  be  considered:  mankind,  and  the  earth  under  their 
feet.  In  the  language  of  economics  there  were  only  two 
elements  in  juxtaposition.  Labor  and  Land.  But  looking 
around  us  in  western  civilization,  the  contrast  is  tremend- 
ous. Although  each  one  of  us  has  neither  more  capital 
nor  more  knowledge  at  the  beginning  of  life  than  had 
primeval  man,  we  are  all  born  into  a  different  world.  We 
do  not  find  ourselves  in  the  midst  of  a  situation  which 
can  be  described  under  the  headings  "Labor"  and  "Land," 
or  mankind  on  the  one  side,  and  the  uncultivated  earth 
on  the  other.  We  grow  up  in  the  midst  of  a  world  which 
contains  an  immense  quantity  and  variety  of  capital,  or 
tools,  in  things  and  ideas,  according  to  the  definitions  al- 
ready given.  In  the  absence  of  capital,  we  should  all  find 
ourselves  in  precisely  the  condition  of  animals,  or  of  early 
prehistoric  mankind,  as  described  in  our  sketch  of  the 
primitive  struggle  for  existence.  It  is  capital  that  enables 
us  to  live  together  in  civilization  and  develop  the  earth's 
resources  in  support  of  associated  human  life.  So  that 
progress  introduces  a  third  factor,  and  we  have  to  de- 
scribe the  progressive  world  under  three  captions,  Land, 


I 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT.       51 

Labor,  and  Capital,  whereof  the  latter  was. at  first  lack- 
ing. 

The  main  proposition  just  at  present  is,  that  the  in- 
creasing association  of  mankind  which  is  revealed  by  his- 
tory is  founded  upon  the  production  of  increasing  amounts 
of  material  and  intangible  capital.  More  formally  and 
technically  stated,  the  integration  of  society  rests  upon  a 
concomitant  integration  of  capital.  It  is  a  familiar  fact 
that  all  kinds  of  undertakings  in  which  we  engage  have 
to  be  provided  with  the  things,  or  means,  or  agencies,  for 
carrying  them  through.  In  brief,  all  of  our  undertakings 
have  to  be  capitalized.  Now,  social  development  as  a 
whole  is  to  be  regarded  as  the  Great  Undertaking  of  his- 
tory; and  a  careful  analysis  of  the  situation  shows  that 
the  conception  commonly  applied  to  the  smaller  aspects 
of  life  should  be  extended  to  the  whole  process  by  which 
civilization  evolves  out  of  animality.  Social  development 
as  a  whole  is  a  process  to  which  the  conception  of  capital- 
ization preeminently  applies.  If  this  point  is  not  at  once 
apparent  in  all  its  bearings,  let  it  also  be  assumed. 

§  23.  —  These  perhaps  tedious  propositions  about 
cleavage,  integration,  capitalization,  etc.,  will  now  pos- 
sibly begin  to  fall  into  a  logical  sequence.  The  foregoing 
treatment  has  prepared  the  way  for  the  following  thesis, 
upon  which  this  examination  turns : 

Social  cleavage  is  one  of  the  principal  factors  in  the 
capitalization  of  social  development* 

The  advance  of  mankind  from  the  scattered,  nomadic, 
animal  condition  into  settled  social  bodies  of  increasing 
size  has  rested  upon  the  use  of  huge  quantities  of  labor 
products,  both  in  the  form  of  diverse  material  capital,  and 
in  the  form  of  immediate  support  for  personal  ministers 

*We  have  concluded  that  this  formulation  of  the  main  thesis  is 
better  than  that  used  in  The  American  Journal  of  Sociology  for  May,  1902, 
p.  766.  We  there  used  the  formula  "Social  cleavage  into  upper  and  lower 
strata  has  effected  the  capitalization  of  social  development,"  qualifying 
it  as  on  p.  767,  1.  32  f.,  and  p.  794,  1.  24  f.,  and  thus  giving  it  the  force 
of  the  statement  employed  in  this  book. 


52  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


to  such  intangible  social  needs  as  those  of  order,  law,  ad- 
ministration, general  science,  cooperative  training,  organi- 
zation, etc.  Directly  or  indirectly,  all  social  necessities 
resolve  themselves  into  a  demand  for  large  and  increasing 
capital.  This  is  produced,  not  by  the  free  cooperation  of 
"individuals"  in  the  conventional  economic  sense,  but  by 
a  vast,  unconscious  cleavage  within  society  itself.  The 
phenomenon  of  cleavage  is  cosmic.  It  appears  with  the 
same  inevitableness  as  the  phenomenon  of  rain  when  at- 
mospheric conditions  are  favorable.  It  is  not  established 
as  the  outcome  of  any  far-seeing  human  plans.  It  is  the 
issue  of  selfishness,  moving  on  the  lines  of  immediate 
pleasure  and  avoidance  of  pain,  and  without  anticipation 
of  good  to  posterity.  Although  capital  freely  takes  the  in- 
dustrial and  commercial  form  during  the  earlier  stages  of 
social  development,  the  growth  of  large  industry  awaits 
the  accumulation  of  intangible  capital.  Thus,  the  earlier 
of  the  great  historic  civilizations  —  the  oriental  and  the 
classic  —  show  a  comparatively  backward  material  devel- 
opment. But  western  civilization,  with  its  energies  freed 
from  the  pioneer  work  of  spiritual  beginnings  by  a  rich 
heritage  from  its  predecessors,  has  more  promptly  turned 
its  capital  into  the  material  form;  and  within  a  period 
comparatively  short,  as  contrasted  with  the  chron- 
ology of  the  ancient  civilizations,  has  developed  a  more 
balanced  social  system  than  the  world  has  ever  seen,  con- 
serving alike  the  material  and  spiritual  forms  of  capital. 
Everybody  who  thinks  about  the  subject  in  a  compe- 
tent way  knows  that  social  development  rests  upon  the  use 
of  large  and  increasing  quantities  of  capital,  and  that 
without  it  society  would  disintegrate  (1).  But  capi- 
tal, like  air,  is  such  a  pervasive  commonplace  that  we  are 
prone  to  take  it  as  a  matter  of  course,  and  think  little 
about  it.  Economists  have,  indeed,  given  a  specialized 
attention  to  capital  in  its  material  forms,  considered  as 
a  "factor  in  production;''  but  they  have  looked  at  it  al- 
most exclusively  in  an  abstract,  a  priori  way,  largely  ig- 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT.       53 

noring  its  actual  genesis  in  their  formal  treatment.*  Eco- 
nomic treatises  tell  us  that  capital  originates  in  '^the  sav- 
ing of  wealth."  Professor  F.  A.  Walker,  for  instance,  in 
his  Political  Economy  (Book  2,  c.  3),  imagines  in  some 
detail  the  transformation  of  a  rude,  poverty-stricken  tribe 
into  a  community  well  stocked  with  capital,  in  which  man- 
ufactures have  sprung  up,  and  wherein  resides  all  the  po- 
tentiality of  a  modern  nation.  The  illustration  is  adduced 
for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  capital  "stands  always 
for  self-denial  and  abstinence,''  and  "arises  solely  out  of 
saving."  But  this  is  true  of  actual  human  society  only  in 
an  abstract  sense.  The  average  student  would  acquire  a 
naive  conception  of  capital  from  an  exposition  like  Pro- 
fessor Walker's.  We  are  correct  in  saying  that  capital 
originates  in  the  reservation,  or  saving,  of  wealth  in  the 
same  sense  that  we  are  correct  in  declaring  a  steamboat 
to  be  propelled  by  the  power  of  steam.  Both  statements 
are  true;  but  neither  statement  satisfactorily  reports  the 
truth.  The  mere  knowledge  that  a  steamboat  is  moved 
by  the  power  of  steam  does  not  tell  us  how  the  thing  is 
done.  Likewise  the  mere  knowledge  that  capital  arises  out 
of  the  saving,  or  reservation,  of  wealth  carries  with  it  no 
understanding  of  capital  as  a  concrete  social  fact.  If  the 
present  interpretation  is  correct,  the  history  of  capital  is 
but  slightly  influenced  by  conventional  ideas  about  absti- 
nence and  self-denial;    and  the  practical  work  of  social 

*  In  partial  qualification,  cf.  Mill,  Principles  of  Political  Economy, 
Bk.  1,  c.  5,  sec.  4 ;  Roscher,  Political  Economy,  sec.  45 ;  Hadley,  Eco- 
nomics (New  York,  1896),  p.  30,  where  the  truth  is  squinted  at,  and 
passed  by.  Cf.  sidelight  in  Bohm-Bawerk,  Positive  Theory  of  Capital 
(Smart's  trans.),  p.  103,  note.  Cf.  also  some  clear  observations  in  Mayo- 
Smith,  Statistics  and  Economics  (New  York,  1899),  pp.  455,  456;  and 
in  a  paper  by  Mr.  Hadley  in  Volume  9  of  the  publications  of  the  American 
Economic  Association,  at  page  560.  A  foreshadowing  of  this  conception 
is  presented  by  Marx,  Capital  (New  York,  1889,  Engel's  trans.),  c.  24; 
but  it  is  not  applied  to  society  considered  as  an  evolution  out  of  prehis- 
toric anarchy;  and  the  historical  treatment  is  unsystematic  and  inac- 
curate. These  drawbacks,  however,  only  reflect  the  difficulties  under  which 
Marx  wrote. 


64  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

development  in  all  its  aspects  is  aceomplislied  by  the  use 
of  huge  quantities  of  lower-class  products,  appropriated 
(or,  perhaps  better,  controlled)  under  the  forms  of  prop- 
erty right  by  a  relatively  small  upper  class  whose  origins 
are  almost  coeval  with  the  beginnings  of  higher  social 
growth.  Doubtless  the  earliest  material  progress  in  the 
prehistoric  period  involved  individualistic  producing  and 
saving  of  capital  in  the  conventional  sense.  Social  cleav- 
age was  not  established  at  a  single  stroke;  and  probably 
it  had  to  struggle  for  existence  like  everything  else.  Per- 
haps the  stone  age  implements  represent  capital  that  was 
owned  by  its  actual  producers.  But  individualism  in  the 
production  of  capital  is  evidently  an  "unfavorable  varia- 
tion." Social  cleavage  arose  in  the  prehistoric  period  to 
compete  with  individualism;  and  in  the  early  historic 
period  we  find  it  everywhere  in  easy  possession  of  the  field. 
Cleavage  has  had  the  effect  of  a  forced  draught  on  a  smol- 
dering fire.  Historically  it  has  been  a  sort  of  cosmic  bel- 
lows without  which  the  flickering  flame  of  progress  must 
have  been  smothered  on  the  lowest  levels  of  culture,  and 
humanity  have  perished  without  a  career. 

Economists,  it  may  be  repeated,  have  tended  to  fall  in 
with  the  conventional,  popular,  individualistic  view  when 
thinking  and  talking  about  society.  While  they  have  often 
admitted  the  invalidity  of  the  individualist  philosophy, 
their  formal  doctrines,  nevertheless,  have  been  hitherto 
controlled  by  individualism.  And  this  is  true  not  only  of 
men  who,  in  a  professional  way,  theorize  about  society, 
but  of  some  who  would  reform  society,  like  the  individual- 
istic single  taxers  and  the  anarchists,  whose  doctrines  in 
many  respects  run  counter  to  those  of  the  professional 
economists.  The  conventional  view  is,  that  society  is  a 
crowd  of  people  who  come  together  on  an  individualistic 
basis,  produce  wealth  from  the  earth's  resources,  hold  back 
part  of  their  wealth  products  for  use  as  capital,  add  their 
capitals  together  in  voluntary  associations,  etc.  But  all 
this  is  true  only  in  an  abstract  sense  which  hides  the  real 
situation.    If  our  general  proposition  is  correct,  society  is 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT.       55 

not  the  result  of  the  free  coming  together  of  individuals; 
and  the  capitalization  of  society  takes  place  in  the  main 
unconsciously,  as  an  unforeseen  incident  of  social  cleav- 
age. 

§  24.  —  This  brings  us  to  one  of  the  paradoxical  cor- 
ollaries of  our  thesis.  Capital,  although  social  in  its 
origin,  has  been  mostly  the  private  property  of  individuals 
from  the  dawn  of  history  down  to  the  present  time  —  in- 
dividuals who  are  members  of,  or  affiliated  with,  the  upper 
class.  It  therefore  needs  to  be  emphasized  at  the  begin- 
ning of  our  inquiry  that  — 

Society  is  a  collectivism,  or  socialism,  developing  un- 
der the  forms  of  individualism. 

The  category  "individualism,''  as  commonly  con- 
ceived, is  invalid  in  its  application  to  society.  "The  con- 
cept ^individualV'  observes  Professor  A.  W.  Small,  "is  one 
of  our  convenient  concessions  to  our  intellectual  incapac- 
ity. In  view  of  our  mental  limitations,  it  is  doubtless  a 
necessary  device,  but  there  is  nothing  in  the  world  of  real- 
ity to  correspond  with  the  notion  which  the  term  ^individ- 
uaP  is  made  to  connote  in  all  the  individualistic  philoso- 
phies" (2).  The  individual  is  an  expression  of  cosmic 
forces  acting  through  himself  and  his  environment. 
Whether  he  is  something  more  than  this,  and  how  far  and 
in  what  sense  the  category  of  individualism  is  valid  in 
sociology,  it  is  not  within  the  province  of  this  work  to 
inquire.* 

§  25.  —  Some  earnest  social  reformers,  whose  infor- 
mation along  certain  lines  is  exceeded  by  their  zeal,  seem 

*  It  should  be  noted  that  we  have  not  said  that  individualism  is  a 
wholly  invalid  sociological  category,  but  only  that  individualism  as  con- 
ventionally, or  popularly,  conceived  is  invalid.  We  do  not  doubt  that 
the  conceptions  of  personal  responsibility  and  free  will  are,  at  least  foi 
practical  life,  good  working  ideas  up  to  a  certain  limit.  But  the  question 
is  not  so  much  one  of  fact  as  of  extent.  The  real  problem  is.  How  far 
does  the  significance  of  individualism  extend  into  the  plexus  of  social 
relationships  and  problems?  If  the  position  to  which  our  inquiry  seems 
to  lead  is  correct,  the  significance  of  individualism  falls  far  short  of  its 
conventional  boundaries. 


56  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


to  think  that  the  vast  lower  class  has  constituted  the 
only  important  part  of  society;  and  that,  from  the  first, 
it  has  occupied  itself  in  the  development  of  agriculture, 
manufactures,  trade,  scientific  knowledge,  etc.,  —  only  to 
be  plundered  and  exploited  by  a  parasitic  and  useless  up- 
per class.  This,  however,  will  not  do.  We  are  entirely 
willing  and  quick  to  admit  that  the  upper  social  stratum 
has  frequently  abused  its  position,  and  that  in  most  if 
not  all  controversies  between  the  upper  and  lower  classes 
the  former  has  been  in  the  wrong ;  but  this,  instead  of  be- 
ing unnatural,  is  normal  to  the  evolutionary  process,  and 
in  itself  constitutes  one  element  of  the  great  social  prob- 
lem. All  truth  is  paradoxical ;  and  cleavage,  formally  the 
sign  of  economic  exploitation,  is  an  adumbration,  or  fore- 
shadowing, of  the  law  of  service.  The  fact  that  the  upper 
class  has  often  abused  its  position  does  not  in  the  least 
militate  against  our  thesis  that  cleavage  is  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal factors  in  the  capitalization  of  society. 

Those  who  think  that  society  could  have  been  organ- 
ized out  of  animalism,  ignorance,  and  violence  on  the 
basis  of  democratic  liberty  and  individual  rights  are 
looking  at  human  history  from  the  standpoint  of  the  later 
achievements  of  progress.  If  we  are  seeking  the  plain 
truth,  and  trying  to  be  merely  accurate,  this  is  just  the 
reverse  of  the  standpoint  that  we  should  take.  Instead  of 
looking  back  on  human  history  we  ought  to  look  forward 
on  history  from  the  standpoint  of  the  primitive  struggle 
for  existence.  From  this  outlook  another  paradoxical 
corollary  of  our  main  proposition  becomes  evident : 

Individual  rights  are  historically  realized  hy  the  ab- 
solute dejiial  of  individual  rights. 

If  social  integration  rests  upon  a  concomitant  inte- 
gration of  capital  which,  in  turn,  results  largely  from  so- 
cial cleavage  —  if  this  is  true,  then  the  paradoxical  and 
apparently  obnoxious  corollary  follows.  For  the  two 
great  historical  bases  of  cleavage  have  been  property  right 
in  men  and  property  right  in  the  earth.  Both  of  these  are 
in  denial  of  the  "natural  and  inalienable'^  right  of  the  in- 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT.       57 

dividual  to  the  proceeds  of  his  own  labor  and  to  free  access 
to  those  natural  resources  which  have  been  produced  by 
no  man.  If  our  position  is  correct,  society  could  not  have 
risen  above  the  levels  of  early  material  progress,  and  the 
smoldering  fire  could  not  have  been  fanned  into  a  blaze, 
without  the  absolute  denial  of  individual  rights.  When 
these  rights  are  finally  acquired  through  modern  de- 
mocracy and  the  changes  that  are  inevitably  to  issue  there- 
from, it  will  become  evident  that  they  too  are  capitalized ! 

§  26. — The  conception  of  capitalization  through  cleav- 
age is  thought  to  give  us  a  clearer  outlook  on  the  facts 
of  history  than  we  have  hitherto  enjoyed,  and  hence  to 
facilitate  the  interpretation  of  society.  It  is  not  put  for- 
ward in  a  dogmatic  spirit ;  nor  do  we  claim  for  it  the  char- 
acter of  a  complete  social  philosophy.  We  regard  it  as 
a  contribution  to  the  study  of  society  in  the  making. 
There  seems  to  be  a  large  field  over  which  the  principle  — 
if  such  it  may  be  called  —  comes  into  active  operation, 
and  in  which  it  plays  an  important  part.  The  conception 
draws  us  into  the  dust  and  turmoil  of  real  life.  It  seizes 
upon  commonplace  facts,  and  is  essentially  simple.  It 
seems  to  indicate  one  of  the  main  channels  through  which 
evolutionary  forces  have  differentiated  the  phenomena  of 
human  association  out  of  anterior  orders  of  reality;  and 
on  all  these  counts  the  study  of  cleavage  appears  to  be  a 
sociological  discipline    of  great  importance. 

While  we  are  inclined,  then,  to  claim  a  considerable 
place  in  the  philosophy  of  history  for  our  supposed  prin- 
ciple, it  is  well  to  emphasize  at  the  very  outset,  by  way  of 
caution,  that  it  affords  only  a  partial  outlook  on  a  large 
subject.  The  danger  of  erecting  special  principles  into 
complete  philosophies  is  ever  with  us,  and  is  often  ignored. 
On  this  point  we  can  do  no  better  than  to  quote  from 
Bishop  Stubbs : 

"Among  the  first  truths  which  the  historical  student, 
or  indeed  any  scientific  scholar,  learns  to  recognize,  this  is 
perhaps  the  most  important,  that  no  theory  or  principle 
works  in  isolation.     The  most  logical  conclusions  from 


58  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  truest  principle  are  practically  false,  unless  in  draw- 
ing them  allowance  is  made  for  the  counterworking  of 
other  principles  equally  true  in  theory,  and  equally  de- 
pendent for  practical  truth  on  coordination  with  the  first. 
No  natural  law  is  by  itself  sufficient  to  account  for  all  the 
phenomena  which  on  the  most  restricted  view  range  them- 
selves within  its  sphere''   (3). 

In  the  scientific  student  of  society  the  statement  of 
this  thesis  —  if  it  satisfy  his  sense  of  probability  —  will  at 
once  awaken  the  desire  to  see  it  illustrated  in  terms  of 
world-history.  On  the  other  hand,  the  student  who  ap- 
proaches the  subject  from  the  standpoint  of  social  reform, 
or  readjustment,  will  tend  to  overleap  the  past,  and  inquire 
into  the  present  and  future  significance  of  the  conception. 
The  latter  question,  although  legitimate,  is  here  out  of 
order.  Bearing  in  mind  the  results  of  the  inquiry  thus 
far,  it  is  now  our  business  to  attempt  a  summary  illustra- 
tion of  our  thesis  in  historical  terms.  The  writer  does  not 
flatter  himself  that  even  if  his  thesis  be  substantially  true, 
he  can  succeed  in  demonstrating  it  to  the  complete  satis- 
faction of  the  reader.  The  most  that  we  can  do  in  this  first 
attempt  is  to  state  the  general  proposition  as  clearly  as 
possible,  and  to  exhibit  the  leading  facts  of  universal  his- 
tory in  relation  to  the  fundamental  phenomena  of  cleav- 
age. 

REVIEW  SUGGESTIONS  OF  THESIS. 

Prior  to  the  beginnings  of  material  progress  men  were  necessarily 
scattered  about  in  small  groups,  like  animals,  and  not  gathered  into  great 
social  bodies.  Being  ignorant  of  industrial  art,  they  depended  upon  a 
precarious  natural  supply  of  food  and  other  necessities.  There  was 
enough  in  the  earth  for  all.  But  men  had  not  the  tools,  the  social  organi- 
zation, the  technical  knowledge,  nor  the  cooperative  habits  necessary 
to  the  development  of  natural  resources.  In  other  words.  Labor  lacked 
the  Capital  which  was  necessary  to  the  efficient  use  of  Land.  Hence  the 
primitive,  animal  struggle  for  existence,  wherein  the  victors  exterminated 
the  vanquished.  Natural  variations  in  the  environment  issued  here  in 
plenty,  and  there  in  scarcity.  Those  who  found  themselves  on  the  best 
locations  had  to  defend  themselves  against  the  onslaughts  of  the  less 
fortunate. 


THE  CAPITALIZATION  OF  SOCIAL  DEVELOPMENT.       m 

But  in  the  midst  of  this  primitive  struggle  for  existence,  the  begin- 
nings of  material  art  began  to  effect  a  revolution.  Rising* above  the- 
animal  state,  men  learned  how  to  make  tools  of  stone  and  metal;  they 
acquired  the  use  of  fire;  they  domesticated  some  of  the  lower  animals; 
they  learned  to  save  seeds  for  planting,  and  thus  laid  the  foundations  of 
agriculture.  Originally,  man  was  compelled,  like  the  animals,  to  take  the 
outer  world  as  he  found  it,  adapting  himself  to  his  physical  environment 
as  best  he  could.  But  now  he  learned  more  and  more  to  adapt  his  environ- 
ment to  himself  by  means  of  art. 

The  beginnings  of  material  progress,  however,  did  not  equalize  those 
natural  conditions  which  produce  here  plenty,  and  there  scarcity.  Those 
unequal  conditions  are  still  in  existence.  And  not  only  this ;  but  it  is  a  mere 
plain  fact  of  history  that  material  progress  itself  has  never  been  the  same 
throughout  the  world.  Some  sections  of  the  race  have  shot  ahead.  Som& 
have  lagged  behind.  The  beginnings  of  material  art,  then,  multiplied 
rather  than  diminished  the  inequalities  obtaining  everywhere.  Larger 
numbers  of  men  were  able  to  live  together  in  social  groups;  but  war 
continued ,  as  before.  War,  however,  became  less  a  struggle  for  exter- 
mination, and  more  a  struggle  for  domination.  Material  progress  en- 
dowed labor  with  the  power  of  producing  a  surplus  over  immediate- 
needs;  and  the  victors  in  war,  instead  of  slaughtering  the  vanquished 
indiscriminately  as  before,  now  began  to  spare  life  and  to  take  captives. 
Hence,  not  only  did  social  groups  increase  in  size;  they  also  stratified 
into  two  principal  classes,  upper  and  lower.  The  upper  class  appro- 
priated the  labor  products  of  the  lower  class,  and  converted  these  products 
largely  into  social  capital  of  all  kinds,  material  and  intangible.  It  is  true 
that  the  upper  and  well-to-do  classes  have  been  the  greatest  beneficiaries 
of  progress  thus  far ;  but  this  has  been  no  fault  of  the  upper  class.  The 
inevitable  reforms,  or  adjustments,  which  will  distribute  the  benefits  of 
progress  more  widely  than  at  present  will  necessarily  proceed  upon  the 
basis  of  a  huge  mass  of  social  capital  which  has  been  accumulated 
mostly  through  the  institution  of  social  cleavage.  Civilization  could 
arise  out  of  the  universal  welter  of  primeval  savagery  and  animalism 
only  as  it  has ;  and  any  scientific  treatment  of  history  must  bring  the  facts 
of  history  into  relation  with  the  phenomena  of  cleavage. 

(1) — Small  and  Vincent,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Society 
(N.  Y.),  pp.  78,  261. 

(2) — Decennial  Publications  of  the  University  of  Chicago,  IV,  p.  128. 

(3) — Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England  (Oxford,  1875),  I,, 
p.  32. 


CHAPTER  V. 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION. 


§  27.  —  In  studying  the  process  of  social  development, 
we  logically  turn  from  prehistoric  and  barbarian  society 
in  general  to  the  ancient  world  that  centered  about  the 
eastern  end  of  the  Mediterranean  sea.  Oriental  civiliza- 
tion was  the  first  great  circle  of  communities  to  come 
forward  into  the  light  of  history,  and,  upon  the  basis  of 
prehistoric  beginnings,  work  out  a  culture  of  sufficient 
power  to  propagate  itself  onward  in  human  experience. 
The  leading  peoples,  or  nations,  of  the  ancient  oriental 
world  were  the  Egyptians,  Babylonians,  Assyrians,  Phoe- 
nicians, and  Israelites.  The  world-historical  place  of  the 
ancient  East  is  well  set  forth  by  Professor  James  Craig 
in  the  following  words: 

^'It  is  a  fact,  more  and  more  plainly  perceived  by 
scholars,  that  among  the  early  peoples  who  have  contri- 
buted to  the  ideas  inwrought  into  our  present  civilization 
there  is  none  to  whom  we  owe  a  greater  debt  than  we  do 
to  the  Semitic  family.  .  .  .  It  is  here  that  we  find  the 
earliest  beginnings  of  civilization  historically  known  to 
us  —  here  that  early  religious  ideas,  social  customs  and 
manners,  political  organizations,  the  beginnings  of  art 
and  architecture,  the  rise  and  growth  of  mythological  ideas 
that  have  endured  and  spread  to  western  nations,  can  be 
seen  and  studied  in  their  earliest  stages,  and  here  alone 
information  is  supplied  which  enables  us  to  follow  them 
most  successfully  in  their  development"   (1). 

§  28.  —  A  survey  of  these  peoples  as  they  come  for- 
ward on  the  stage  of  history  shows  that  there  was  no  such 
distinction  of  social  structures  and  functions  among  them 

60 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  61- 

as  we  find  in  the  latest  social  theory  and  practice.  The 
organization  of  society  into  definite  institutions,  indus- 
trial, political,  religious,  domestic,  educational,  etc.,  each 
having  its  own  special  function  to  discharge  and  giving  its 
own  peculiar  direction  to  the  human  life  common  to  them 
all  —  this  is  a  modern  idea  and  practice,  and  was  but 
faintly  foreshadowed  in  the  life  and  thought  of  oriental 
civilization.  Society  develops,  like  other  growing  things, 
from  the  simple  to  the  complex,  from  the  indefinite  to  the 
definite;  and  we  should  not  be  surprised  to  find  that  the 
oriental  community  was  far  more  primitive,  and  far  less 
definite  in  structure,  than  the  social  order  in  which  we 
live.  This  ancient  world  was  indeed  much  nearer  the  pre- 
historic beginnings  than  we  are  commonly  inclined  to 
think.  We  are  often  reminded  that  written  history  sup- 
plies only  the  later  part  of  man^s  life  on  the  earth ;  and  in 
a  chronological  sense  this  is  true.  But  modern  research 
into  the  evolution  of  society  has  made  it  clear  that  his- 
torical perspective  is  determined,  not  by  chronology,  but 
by  achievement.  Prehistoric  ages  doubtless  embrace  a 
much  longer  stretch  of  time  than  historic  ages ;  but  from 
the  standpoint  of  achievement,  prehistoric  times  contract, 
while  the  ages  of  written  history  expand.  Comparing  the 
achievements  of  historic  times  with  the  results  of  pre- 
historic progress,  as  illustrated  by  archaeology  and  the 
life  of  savage  and  barbarian  tribes,  it  is  evident  that  the 
earliest  recorded  societies  are,  so  to  speak,  earlier  than 
they  seem  to  be.  The  social  constitution  of  the  Orient  was 
primitive  because  the  Orient  was  itself  a  primitive  society. 
Interrogate  the  ancient  East  for  its  own  theory  of  things, 
and  no  great  scientific  thinkers  come  forward  to  make 
answer.  Egypt  had  no  Aristotle ;  Babylonia  had  no  Spen- 
cer. Oriental  thought  was  deductive,  a  priori^  primitive. 
Human  thought  reflects  human  life. 

If,  now,  instead  of  trying  to  discover  some  complex 
plan,  or  theory,  of  society  whereon  our  ideas  may  turn  in 
the  study  of  the  earliest  historic  civilization  —  if,  instead 
of  this,  we  bear  in  mind  the  facts  and  principles  outlined 


•62  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY, 

in  previous  chapters,  the  problem  will  be  simplified,  and 
our  task  will  be  reduced  to  workable  dimensions.  If  the 
present  interpretation  is  correct,  oriental  society  is  to  be 
approached  primarily  from  the  standpoint  of  its  cleavage 
into  upper  and  lower  strata.  It  is  here  that  we  seem  to 
find  a  comprehensive  clue  to  a  practical  study  of  the  facts. 

§  29.  —  First,  let  us  try  to  mark  off  the  political  forces 
and  institutions,  or,  rather,  that  side  of  oriental  life  which 
corresponds  to  them.  We  must  bear  in  mind  that  the 
comparatively  undeveloped  condition  of  this  ancient  so- 
ciety makes  exact  discrimination  impossible. 

In  the  light  of  our  modern  conception  of  the  state  as 
embracing  all  the  people  of  a  given  territory,  and  of  gov- 
ernment as  the  agent  of  such  a  state,  it  requires  an  effort 
of  the  imagination  to  turn  backward  and  realize  the  true 
nature  of  politics  in  the  earlier  ages  of  social  evolution. 
In  the  ancient  East,  government  was  a  prerogative  of  pro- 
perty in  men  and  in  the  soil,  an  incidental  function  of  the 
upper  class;  and  there  was  no  abstract  idea  of  the  state 
at  all.    In  Egypt  — 

"There  existed  an  aristocracy,  the  nobility,  in  whose 
hands  lay  the  government  of  the  towns  and  of  the  nomes 
[provinces]  to  which  they  belonged.  They  sat  in  the  seats 
of  their  ^fathers,  the  nobility  of  ancient  days,^  and  they 
present  the  best  example  of  a  hereditary  nobility.  Their 
riches  consisted  chiefly  in  landed  property,  and  in  their 
tombs  we  see  [pictures  of]  long  processions  of  peasant  men 
and  women  representing  the  various  villages  belonging  to 
the  deceased''   (2). 

"The  noble  class  of  the  Egyptian  people  had  nothing 
in  common  with  the  vulgar  mob.  ...  To  them  were 
committed  the  highest  offices  of  the  court.  .  .  .  The 
nobles  held  as  their  hereditary  possessions  villages  and 
tracts  of  land,  with  the  laboring  people  thereto  belonging, 
bands  of  servants,  and  numerous  heads  of  cattle"   (3). 

In  this  respect  Egypt  was  typical  of  all  the  ancient 
East.  The  government  of  society  was  everywhere  in  con- 
trol of  the  upper  class;    and  everywhere  the  upper  class 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION.  63 

itself  was  organized  into  "clans,"  "houses,"  or  "families." 
In  our  survey  of  the  primitive  struggle  for  existence  we 
saw  that  the  earliest  social  groups  naturally  formed  them- 
selves on  the  lines  of  the  family.  In  view  of  this  fact  there 
is  nothing  strange  in  the  supremacy  of  the  family  in  the 
original  politics  of  all  historical  peoples.  Early  aristo- 
cracy was  invariably  the  outgrowth  of  the  evolution  of 
warring  clanships  which  fused  into  tribal  corporations, 
and  gradually  accumulated  a  lower  class  of  slaves.  In  set- 
tled communities  these  clans,  or  families,  had  been  long 
established,  as  a  rule.  In  wandering  tribes  there  were  al- 
ways military  chiefs  who  were  in  process  of  founding 
families. 

The  Israelites  furnish  good  illustrations  of  houses  in 
process  of  formation,  and  of  houses  already  founded. 
Most  of  the  important  characters  in  the  Old  Testament 
literature  either  belonged  to  the  nobility  or  worked 
their  w^ay  into  it.  Whether  he  be  a  historical  person  or 
not,  Abraham  is  a  good  example  of  the  tribal  prince.  We 
are  told,  in  Genesis  14,  that  he  was  able  to  gather  and 
command  three  hundred  and  eighteen  slaves  (inaccurately 
rendered  "servants"),  "born  in  his  house."  Not  having 
passed  from  the  nomadic  to  the  settled  life,  he  had  no 
landed  estates;  and  his  property  consisted  principally  of 
slaves  and  cattle.  Under  these  circumstances  it  was  a 
matter  of  course  that  he  possessed  other  valuables,  the 
products  of  labor.  In  chapter  13  we  read  that  he  was 
"very  rich  in  cattle,  in  silver  and  in  gold ;"  and  in  chapter 
23  we  learn  that  he  was  able  to  pay  "four  hundred  shekels 
of  silver,  current  money  with  the  merchant,"  for  a  grave- 
yard. Another  person  of  the  same  social  position  was  the 
famous  Job,  to  whom  apply  the  same  observations  re- 
specting historical  reality.  In  the  first  chapter  of  the  book 
bearing  his  name  we  learn  that  "his  substance  was  seven 
thousand  sheep,  and  three  thousand  camels,  and  five  hun- 
dred yoke  of  oxen,  and  five  hundred  she-asses,  and  a  very 
great  household ;  so  that  this  man  was  the  greatest  of  all 
the  children  of  the  east."     Of  course,  the  personal  labor 


64  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

of  such  a  man  was  not  the  force  that  purchased,  and  gath- 
ered together,  and  cared  for,  the  property  in  his  posses- 
sion. He  was  simply  an  upper-class  individual  who,  by 
force  of  property  rights,  was  able  to  appropriate  the  fruits 
of  the  labor  of  other  people. 

Social  development  in  its  prehistoric  beginnings,  then, 
must  be  regarded  as  a  scramble  wherein  the  masses  be- 
come subordinate  to  property-holding  classes  who  organ- 
ize communal  control,  or  government. 

§  30.  —  As  the  smaller  groups  are  fused  into  aggre- 
gates of  national  dignity,  the  local  governments  are  com- 
bined under  the  authority  of  a  general  ruler,  or  king. 
The  kingly  office  is  at  first  elective,  but  with  a  tendency 
to  become  hereditary ;  and  sooner  or  later  it  is  associated 
with  the  holding  of  a  larger  amount  of  property  than  is 
possessed  by  any  other  member  of  the  upper  class.  Gov- 
ernment, then,  is  at  first  naturally  of  limited  scope.  Later, 
as  tribes  are  settled  permanently  on  the  soil  and  formed 
into  larger  communities,  general  governments  are  estab- 
lished. Local  authority  is  exercised  by  some  member  of 
the  nobility,  who  is  perhaps  elected  by  his  peers,  or  who 
perhaps  holds  his  office  by  right  of  descent  from  some 
earlier  chief.  Separate  communities  occupying  any  region 
of  uniform,  or  fairly  uniform,  physical  characteristics,  in 
which  transportation  and  communication  are  not  matters 
of  great  difficulty,  tend  to  develop  a  general  government 
at  an  early  period.  This  result,  however,  is  not  always 
brought  about  in  just  the  same  way.  Perhaps  the  pressure 
of  invasion  forces  union  for  the  common  defense,  the  fam- 
ily and  tribal  chiefs  electing  a  leader  from  their  number. 
Perhaps  the  invaders  are  successful,  their  leader  proclaim- 
ing himself  as  king  of  all  that  territory,  and  apportioning 
the  soil  and  its  inhabitants  among  his  officers  and  princi- 
pal followers.  In  either  case,  whether  the  invasion  is  suc- 
cessful or  not,  the  communities  of  such  a  region  are  never 
afterward  the  same.  The  foundations  of  general  control 
and  affiliation  have  been  laid;  and,  in  spite  of  drawbacks, 
the  tendency  thus  manifested  represents  a  permanent  so- 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION.  65 

cial  force  which  finds  expression  in  many  ways.  The  king 
is  merely  a  well-to-do  man  of  the  free  families  —  and  some- 
times of  humbler  origin  —  elevated  to  royal  dignity  by 
the  votes  of  the  upper  class. 

The  masses  of  the  people  bear  allegiance  to  the  king 
only  in  an  indirect  way  through  their  local  rulers.  This 
rough  constitution,  called  "feudalism/'  tends  to  prevail 
for  It  time  wherever  mankind  leave  the  wandering  life, 
and  advance  into  settled  society.  The  ancient  East  never 
passed  beyond  it.  The  student  of  social  evolution  who  is 
fully  conscious  of  the  animalistic  anarchy  out  of  which  civ- 
ilization develops,  is  prepared  to  see  that  the  character  of 
early  government  is  of  smaller  significance  than  the  fact 
of  government.  As  Mr.  Bagehot  has  well  said,  "in  early 
times  the  quantity  of  government  is  much  more  important 
than  its  quality.  What  you  want  is  a  comprehensive  rule 
binding  men  together''     (4). 

A  good  example  of  the  formation  of  a  general  oriental 
government  in  accordance  with  these  tendencies  is  found 
in  ancient  Egypt.  Some  suggestions  of  earlier  Egyptian 
development  are  supplied  by  the  orientalist  Maspero  in  the- 
following  passage: 

"We  must  .  .  .  pronounce  the  first  Egyptians  ta 
have  been  semi-savages,  like  those  still  living  in  Africa 
and  America,  having  an  analogous  organization,  and  simi- 
lar weapons  and  tools.  A  few  lived  in  the  desert,  in  the 
oasis  of  Libya  to  the  east,  or  in  the  deep  valleys  of  the  Red 
Land  .  .  .  between  the  Nile  and  the  Sea ;  the  poverty 
of  the  country  fostering  their  native  savagery.  The 
Egyptians,  even  in  late  times,  had  not  forgotten  the  ties 
of  common  origin  which  linked  them  to  these  still  barbar- 
ous tribes"  (5). 

It  is  very  plain  that  the  famous  people  of  the  Nile 
were  not  united  in  one  state  from  the  first;  and  that  or- 
iginally they  were  split  up  into  many  political  entities,  or 
principalities,  having  little  or  no  connection  with  each 
other     (6).     In    time   these   principalities    were   consoli- 

5 


66  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

dated  into  two  groups,  constituting  Upper  and  Lower 
Egypt;  while  the  Pharaohs  of  history,  who  ruled  over  a 
united  Egypt,  wore  a  double  crown,  symbolical  of  the  sov- 
ereignty and  earlier  independence  of  the  two  great  divi- 
sions of  the  country.  The  local  principalities  represented 
the  prehistoric  tribes  or  clanships  which,  in  ages  past,  had 
settled  there;  while  the  principalities  themselves,  until 
far  down  in  the  course  of  Egyptian  history,  bore  the  ani- 
mal totem  names  which  had  once  belonged  to  the  original 
clans. 

A  more  familiar  and  equally  good  illustration  of  the 
formation  of  general  governments  is  found  in  the  history 
of  the  Israelites.  As  previously  remarked,  most  of  the 
important  characters  in  Israelitish  history  belong  to  the 
free  families  of  the  upper  social  stratum.  Under  this  upper 
stratum  lay  the  lower  class,  constantly  increasing  in  size. 
The  free  families,  or  "father's  houses,"  were  affiliated  in 
clans  and  tribes  which  conquered  the  land  of  Canaan,  and 
partly  subjugated  and'  partly  allied  themselves  with 
its  earlier  inhabitants.  Cleavage  was,  of  course,  more 
prominent  after  the  conquest  than  it  had  been  during  the 
nomadic  life  of  the  tribes  in  the  desert.  After  the  set- 
tlement of  Israel  in  Canaan  the  family  and  tribal  juris- 
dictions were  converted  into  territorial  governments  hav- 
ing only  limited  authority.  Later  a  national  government 
was  established  by  the  choice  of  a  king  from  the  free 
families  of  the  upper  class. 

There  was  no  such  political  life  in  the  ancient  ori- 
ental world  as  there  is  today  among  the  modern  demo- 
cratic peoples.  Oriental  monarchies  have  always  tended 
to  be  "absolute."  But  there  were  necessarily  much  pri- 
vate discussion  and  factional  difference  within  the  govern- 
ments themselves;  and  the  sociologist  will  appraise  this 
abused  political  term,  "absolute,"  at  its  true  value. 

§  31.  —  It  is  not  easy  to  indicate  just  where  the  gov- 
ernmental activities  of  the  upper  class  merged  into  its 
other  functions.  At  the  least,  the  local  and  general  gov- 
ernments did  a  great  deal  that  government  now  does. 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION.  67 

They  actively  promoted  social  peace  and  order,  made  pro- 
vision for  the  common  defense,  constructed  roads  and  ca- 
nals, fostered  commerce,  and  set  up  judicial  tribunals. 
Let  us  take  another  illustration  from  Egypt. 

"The  encouragement  of  trade  and  commerce,  the  es- 
tablishment and  improvement  of  commercial  routes,  the 
digging  of  wells,  the  formation  of  reservoirs,  the  protec- 
tion of  roads  by  troops,  the  building  of  ships,  the  explora- 
tion of  hitherto  unknown  seas  —  such  were  the  special  ob- 
jects which  the  monarchs  of  the  eleventh  dynasty  [about 
3,000-2,800  B.  C]  set  before  them,  such  the  lines  of  ac- 
tivity into  which  they  threw  their  own  energies  and  the 
practical  ability  of  their  people"  (7). 

This  policy  obtained  its  greatest  development  in  the 
times  of  the  succeeding,  or  twelfth,  dynasty,  under  which, 
as  Lenormant  has  observed,  Egypt  reached  its  apogee  (8). 

But  sometimes  the  king's  energies  were  otherwise  oc- 
cupied : 

"A  considerable  part  of  his  time  was  taken  up  in  war 
—  in  the  east,  against  the  Libyans  in  the  regions  of  the 
Oasis;  in  the  Nile  Valley  to  the  south  of  Aswan  against 
the  Nubians;  on  the  Isthmus  of  Suez  and  in  the  Sinaitic 
peninsula  against  the  Bedouin;  frequently  also  in  civil 
war  against  some  ambitious  noble  or  some  turbulent  mem- 
ber of  his  own  family"   (9). 

This  illustrates  again  the  danger  to  which  every  early 
settled  society  is  exposed.  War  was  a  prominent  factoi^ 
in  the  consolidation  of  ancient  societies.  They  were  al- 
ways being  attacked  or  threatened  by  communities  on  the 
same  level  of  culture,  and  by  militant  tribes  of  inferior 
achievements.  Hence  they  were  compelled  at  the  very 
least  to  stand  on  the  defensive ;  and  they  were  often  forced 
to  take  the  offensive,  and  chastise  or  subjugate  belligerent 
outsiders  if  possible.  This  fundamental  necessity  for  war 
bred  a  martial  tendency  which  easily  passed  over  into 
a  habit  of  war,  whether  defense  were  strictly  necessary  or 
not;  so  that  the  line  between  necessary  and  unnecessary 
wars  is  often  impossible  to  define. 


68  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

§  32.  —  The  subject  of  governmental  supply,  as  com- 
pared with  that  of  government  itself,  is,  for  a  long  time^ 
of  secondary  importance.  The  fact  of  governmental  sup- 
port is  more  significant  than  the  exact  source  or  nature  of 
the  support.  In  other  words,  the  science  of  governmental 
revenue  necessarily  remains  in  abeyance  while  government 
itself  is  becoming  organized  and  doing  its  preliminary 
work.  If  we  bear  in  mind  the  process  by  which  political 
union  originally  comes  about,  we  shall  not  find  it  difficult 
to  comprehend  the  main  lines  of  primitive  taxation. 
Large  landed  estates  are  connected  with  the  throne  at  an 
early  period;  and  from  these  are  defrayed  the  ordinary 
expenses  of  the  court.  In  the  conduct  of  war  the  king  calls 
upon  his  nobles  throughout  the  country;  and  these  re- 
spond by  bringing  up  contingents  of  armed  men  from  their 
estates.  We  reproduce  a  pertinent  passage  from  Mas- 
pero  : 

"The  duties  enforced  by  the  feudal  [Egyptian]  state 
do  not  appear  to  have  been  onerous.  In  the  first  place, 
there  was  the  regular  payment  of  tribute,  proportionate 
to  the  extent  and  resources  of  the  fief.  In  the  next  place, 
there  was  military  service:  the  vassal  agreed  to  supply, 
when  called  upon,  a  fixed  number  of  armed  men,  whom  he 
himself  commanded,  unless  he  could  offer  a  reasonable  ex- 
cuse"  (10). 

The  operations  of  local  government,  on  the  other 
hand,  were  partly  defrayed  by  the  forced  labor  of  the 
lower  class,  and  partly  by  general  taxation  of  property. 
Of  taxation  in  detail,  however,  more  later. 

§  33.  —  In  oriental  society  industry  never  attained 
anything  like  its  modern  development.  The  industrial 
phase  of  social  evolution  is  illustrated  more  fully  by  the 
economic  history  of  our  western  civilization;  and  we 
shall  go  more  carefully  into  it  at  a  later  stage  of  our  in- 
quiry. In  this  connection  we  must  be  content  with  a  very 
brief  treatment,  partly  in  the  light  of  oriental  evidence^ 
and  partly  in  view  of  European  experience. 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION.  69 

Our  survey  of  prehistoric  material  progress  indicated 
that  the  elaboration  of  stone  tools  preceded  the  domesti- 
cation of  animals  and  the  saving  of  seeds  for  planting. 
It  is  fairly  a  matter  of  popular  knowledge  that  shepherd- 
ing, or  cattle  raising,  forms  a  principal  occupation  in  the 
nomadic  stage  of  social  evolution;  and  that  to  this  is 
added  agriculture  as  one  of  the  major  occupations  when, 
at  a  still  further  stage,  men  have  begun  to  settle  per- 
manently upon  the  soil.  Now,  oriental  society,  at  the 
period  of  its  emergence  into  the  era  of  written  records, 
had  moved  up  out  of  the  stone  age  into  a  period  wherein 
cattle  raising  and  agriculture  were  the  main  industries. 
These  two  great  occupations  were  organized  under  the 
proprietorship  of  an  aristocracy  whereof  the  Old  Testa- 
ment characters  already  cited  can  be  taken  as  examples. 
This  aristocracy,  conformably  to  the  historical  order  of 
material  progress  just  noted,  was  based  originally  on  slav- 
ery; but  as  society  became  settled,  the  upper  class  natur- 
ally appropriated  the  land  —  first  in  common,  and  then  in 
severalty. 

In  studying  the  industrial  phase  of  social  growth  we 
must,  indeed,  bear  constantly  and  prominently  in  mind 
the  great  institution  of  cleavage,  not  only  as  based  in  its 
primary  form  upon  slavery,  but  as  based  more  and  more 
upon  landownership.  We  must  be  careful  not  to  acquire 
a  merely  statical  conception  of  these  facts.  We  must  re- 
member that  slavery  precedes  land  monopoly;  and  that 
the  bonds  of  slavery  are  not  relaxed  until  the  influence  of 
land  monopoly  is  fully  established.  Of  these  two  forms  of 
cleavage,  property  right  in  men  is  historically  the  first. 
Then  slavery  and  property  right  in  the  earth  are  inter- 
mingled. Finally,  as  in  western  civilization,  property 
right  in  human  beings  is  abolished;  and  the  lower  class 
obtains  personal  freedom.  But  by  this  time  the  upper 
class  has  largely,  or  completely,  enclosed  the  soil ;  and  the 
lower  class,  although  formally  and  legally  free,  is  not  ac- 
tually free. 


70  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

We  obtain  views  of  the  vast  working  masses  through 
the  following  passages  by  orientalists.  The  first  is  by  Pro- 
fessor Sayce: 

"Slavery  was  part  of  the  foundation  upon  which 
Babylonian  society  rested.  .  .  .  Slavery  prevented 
wages  from  rising  by  flooding  the  labor  market,  and  the 
free  artisan  had  to  compete  wdth  a  vast  body  of 
slaves"   (11). 

The  next  relates  to  Egypt,  and  is  by  Professor  W.  M. 
Muller. 

"The  best  part  of  the  population,  undoubtedly,  was  to 
be  found,  not  in  the  haughty  scribes  and  priests     .     .     . 
but  in  the  peasants.     .     .     .     Most  of  them  were  serfs  — 
of  the  king,  or  of  temples,  or  of  landowners"   (12). 

To  these  passages  we  may  add  the  quotations  already 
taken  from  Erman,  Maspero,  and  Brugsch  in  connection 
with  our  survey  of  the  political  phase.  They  all  show  that 
at  the  basis  of  oriental  society  was  the  lower  class  en- 
gaged mostly  in  the  labor  of  shepherding  and  agriculture 
under  the  proprietorship  of  a  slaveholding  and  landown- 
ing nobility,  the  upper  class  being  organized  into  families, 
or  clans. 

In  the  midst  of  shepherding  and  farming  communi- 
ties, towns  and  cities  began  to  grow  up  everywhere.  It  is 
impossible  to  show  just  when  these  aggregates  of  popula- 
tion began  to  be  gathered  together ;  but  the  main  facts  are 
clear.  There  was  necessarily  a  time  in  early  history  when 
towns  and  cities  had  no  existence;  a  period  at  length  ar- 
rived in  which  they  began  to  come  into  prominence;  and 
the  causes  promoting  their  development  lie  all  abroad  in 
the  economic  history  of  the  world. 

Towns  in  general  are  inseparably  connected  with  the 
growth  of  commerce  and  manufacture.  Of  course,  these 
occupations  take  their  rise  before  town  life  proper  has  be- 
gun; but  it  is  to  the  further  growth  of  commerce  and 
manufactures,  and  their  subsequent  separation  in  large 
part  from  the  earlier  and  more  primitive  industries  of 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION.  71 

shepherding  and  agriculture,  that  town  life  in  general  is 
due. 

Let  us  look  at  commerce  first.  No  locality  is  likely 
to  furnish  everything  that  its  inhabitants  want  or  can  use. 
Differences  of  soil,  climate  and  mineral  deposits  result  in 
more  products  of  a  given  kind  in  one  region  than 
its  people  need.  Another  part  of  the  country 
shows  a  deficiency  in  respect  of  that  particular 
product,  and  an  oversupply  of  something  else.  Dif- 
ferences of  this  kind  give  rise  to  commerce,  or 
the  exchange  of  labor  products.  Exchange  arose  at  an 
early  period  in  the  ancient  east.  A  large  trade  grew  up 
between  Egypt,  Arabia,  Syria,  Mesopotamia,  Greece,  and 
outlying  barbarian  tribes  (13).  In  connection  with  the 
exchange  of  products  it  becomes  convenient  and  even  nec- 
essary to  establish  definite  centers  where  trade  can  be 
regularly  and  peacefully  carried  on;  and  this  is  only  an- 
other way  of  saying  that  towns  are  involved  in  the  growth 
of  commerce. 

The  other  principal  factor  of  which  we  have  spoken 
as  contributory  to  town  life  is  manufactures.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  long  before  the  rise  of  urban  groups,  manufac- 
turing occupations  are,  in  a  small  way,  necessary  on  ag- 
ricultural estates,  in  the  production  of  tools,  clothing, 
houses,  outbuildings,  etc.  In  this  fact  w^e  see  the  forces 
which  at  length  set  aside  the  more  clever  workers  as  crafts- 
men in  contrast  with  the  more  primitive  workers,  whose 
occupations  remain  those  of  tilling  the  soil  and  caring  for 
livestock.  As  population  multiplies,  and  increases  the 
amount  of  manufacturing  work  to  be  done,  it  is  more  effi- 
cient for  artisans  to  be  stationed  at  the  points  where  raw 
material  exchanges.  Hence  the  influence  of  this  branch  of 
industry  upon  town  life. 

It  is  important  to  emphasize  that  both  commerce  and 
manufacture  are  at  first  aristocratic  in  form,  and  largely 
so  in  substance.  Commerce  is  primarily  the  exchange 
of  their  appropriations  among  the  upper  classes  of  differ- 
ent  localities    (14).     Its  aristocratic   form,   however,   is 


72  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

misleading  unless  we  look  below  the  surface,  for  while  it 
secures  the  exchange  of  products  intended  for  the  use  of 
the  upper  class,  it  also  provides  that  circulation  of  raw 
materials  and  tools  which  promotes  the  subsistence  and 
steady  employment  of  the  lower  class. 

The  oriental  nobility  usually  retained  personal 
property  rights  over  commerce,  managing  its  operations 
through  a  corps  of  slave-stewards.  The  steward  was 
placed  in  authority  over  his  fellow  slaves.  The  figures  of 
the  oriental  aristocrat  and  his  steward  are  familiar  in  the 
literature  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  steward  of  Abra- 
ham's house  was  Eliezer  of  Damascus  (Genesis  15:2.  Of. 
1  Ohronicles  2:34,  35);  and  the  master  and  his  steward 
reappear  in  the  New  Testament  in  the  parables  of  Jesus. 
Being  the  most  important  slave  in  his  owner's  employ- 
ment, the  steward  was  favored  in  proportion.  In  order  to 
stimulate  him  to  the  most  efficient  service  he  was  per- 
mitted to  retain  a  commission  on  the  products  whose 
exchange  he  superintended.  In  this  way  he  could  ac- 
cumulate considerable  wealth  of  his  own  in  the  form 
of  goods,  and  of  money,  and  sometimes  of  slaves.  He 
might  even  buy  his  freedom,  and  set  up  as  an  inde- 
pendent manager  of  commerce.  It  was  only  from  the 
ranks  of  a  servile  merchant  class  that  a  free  merch- 
ant class  could  originate  in  early  times.  A  servile 
trading  class  necessarily  preceded  a  free  trading  class. 
In  spite  of  the  tendency  toward  the  formation  of  a 
mercantile  body  distinct  from  the  ancient  nobility,  the  cur- 
rents of  oriental  trade  were  not  great  enough  to  produce  a 
"third  estate"  of  sufficient  strength  to  assert  itself  col- 
lectively against  the  older  nobility.  In  Greece  and  Kome, 
as  well  as  in  modern  civilization,  economic  development 
produced  a  "third  estate"  of  great  extent  and  influence. 
In  these  later  historical  cases,  a  powerful  social  class  was 
brought  into  existence  outside  the  pale  of  government,  — 
since  politics,  as  we  have  seen,  is  always  originally  in  the 
hands  of  the  free  families  of  descent.  In  the  classic  and 
western  civilizations  this  new  section  of  the  upper  class 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION. 


was  discriminated  against  by  the  older  section  of  the  up- 
per class  through  its  control  of  the  taxing  power  and  the 
courts.  Great  historic  collisions  resulted,  whose  out- 
come, in  both  classic  and  western  civilization,  was  the 
admission  of  the  newly  rich  to  a  voice  in  the  government. 
In  ancient  Greece  and  Rome,  and  in  modern  Europe  and 
America,  the  basis  of  the  state  was  thus  transferred  from 
that  of  family  to  that  of  property  regardless  of  descent. 
In  the  oriental  civilization,  however,  nothing  of  the  kind 
seems  to  have  occurred.  Nobilities  always  possess  a  lim- 
ited assimilative  capacity.  It  is  probable  that  the  forma- 
tion of  the  oriental  third  estate  never  greatly  outstripped 
the  assimilative  capacity  of  upper-class  oriental  families. 
Free  merchants  who  accumulated  wealth  from  commis- 
sions on  the  goods  they  handled,  and  who  bought  land 
and  slaves  of  their  own  therewith,  were  doubtless  admitted 
to  the  ancient  families  either  by  marriage  or  by  the  solemn 
ceremony  of  adoption.  So  that  mostly,  as  remarked  a 
moment  ago,  the  clan  aristocracy  of  the  ancient  East  re- 
tained the  proprietorship  of  commerce  in  its  own  hands. 
In  Babylonia,  for  instance,  the  original  nobility  of  birth, 
based  on  landholding,  was  eventually  transformed  into  a 
class  predominantly  commercial  in  character     (15). 

The  aristocratic  nature  of  early  manufacture,  like 
that  of  early  commerce,  becomes  manifest  when  we  re- 
flect upon  the  outstanding  facts  of  organized  society. 
Since  the  upper  class  everywhere  appropriated  the  major 
part  of  the  labor  products  of  the  masses,  it  was  necessarily 
this  class  that  patronized  the  artisans  of  ancient  cities. 
Pertinent  suggestions  are  found  in  the  following  passage 
from  Rawlinson : 

"Trade  flourished  under  the  Pharaohs,  and  was  en- 
couraged not  only  by  the  lavish  expenditure  of  the  Court, 
of  the  great  nobles,  and  of  the  high  ecclesiastics,  but  also 
by  the  vast  demand  which  there  was  for  Egyptian  produc- 
tions in  foreign  countries''  (16). 

Each  of  the  great  administrative  offices  in  Egypt 
possessed  its  own  craftsmen  and  workmen     (17). 


74  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

It  is  often  said  that  when  the  lower  classes  are  held 
in  chattel  slavery,  or  bound  as  serfs  to  the  estates  of  great 
landowners,  there  can  be  no  "mobility  of  labor"  as  there 
is  in  modern  times  when  the  lower  class  enjoys  personal 
freedom,  and  can  come  and  go  in  response  to  the  demands 
of  the  market.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  an  active 
trade  in  slaves  located  skilled  and  unskilled  labor  where 
it  was  most  wanted;  and  the  mobility  of  labor  was  per- 
haps as  great,  in  proportion  to  the  development  of  the 
age,  as  it  is  today  among  the  more  advanced  western  peo- 
ples. This  is  only  another  example  of  the  erroneous  ideas 
that  gain  currency  in  modern  times  respecting  the  social 
economy  of  the  ancients.  We  are  too  often  tempted  to 
think  of  the  society  of  early  times  as  immovably  fixed, 
when  in  reality  it  illustrates  the  law  of  development  as 
fully  in  its  own  way  as  does  modern  civilization. 

§  34.  —  The  rise  of  commerce  illustrates,  by  the  way, 
a  fact  of  importance  in  connection  with  our  thesis.  There 
is  danger  of  acquiring  too  rigorous  an  idea  of  the  principle 
with  which  we  are  working.  Social  cleavage  into  upper 
and  lower  strata  is  an  institution  within  the  bowels  of 
society,  rather  than  the  mark  of  two  utterly  contrasted 
and  mutually  exclusive  social  orders.  When  the  noble 
class  did  not  retain  personal  proprietorship  of  commerce, 
and  an  independent  merchant  class  arose,  it  is  plain  that 
the  latter  was  drawn  from  the  lower  people  by  a  rigid 
process  of  selection.  Even  when  the  slave-managers  of 
commerce  did  not  succeed  in  reaching  legal  freedom,  they 
were  favored  in  proportion  to  their  importance,  and  were 
living  witnesses  to  a  social  mobility  which,  in  fact  if  not  in 
law,  recruited  the  upper,  directive  stratum  from  the  best 
elements  of  the  lower. 

But  it  was  not  commerce  alone  that  illustrated  this 
important  fact.  Ewald  observes,  in  reference  to  the 
slave-stewards  of  noble  houses,  that  "in  order  to  prevent 
dispersion  of  the  family  property  in  default  of  a  male  heir, 
such  a  one  was  often  adopted  as  a  son,  or  married  to  his 
master's  daughter''     (18).     In  Genesis  15  we  read  that 


ORIENTAL  CIVILIZATION.  75 

Abraham  recognizes  his  steward,  Eliezer  of  Damascus,  as 
his  heir  in  case  no  son  is  born  to  the  family.  In  1  Chron- 
icles 2 :34  the  same  custom  is  illustrated  in  the  following 
words :  "Now  Sheshan  had  no  sons,  but  daughters.  And 
Sheshan  had  a  slave,  an  Egyptian,  whose  name  was  Jarha. 
And  Sheshan  gave  his  daughter  to  Jarha  his  slave  to  wife." 

Other  glimpses  into  class  relations,  with  respect  to 
the  passage  from  the  inferior  to  the  superior  stratum,  are 
afforded  by  the  following  selections  from  the  modern  liter- 
ature of  Egyptian  history. 

"Many  a  monument  consecrated  to  the  memory  of 
some  nobleman  gone  to  his  long  home,  who  during  life 
had  held  high  rank  at  the  court  of  Pharaoh,  is  decorated 
with  the  simple  but  laudatory  inscription,  ^his  ancestors 
were  unknown  people' ''     (19).. 

"In  the  schools  where  the  poor  scribe's  child  sat  on 
the  same  bench  beside  the  offspring  of  the  rich,  to  be 
trained  in  discipline  and  wise  learning,  the  masters  knew 
how  by  timely  words  to  goad  on  the  lagging  diligence  of 
the  ambitious  scholars,  holding  out  to  them  the  future 
reward  which  awaited  youths  skilled  in  knowledge  and  let- 
ters. .  .  .  Even  the  clever  son  of  the  poor  man  might 
hope  by  his  knowledge  to  climb  the  ladder  of  the  higher 
offices,  for  neither  his  birth  nor  his  position  in  life  raised 
any  barrier,  if  only  the  youth's  mental  power  justified 
fair  hopes  for  the  future.  In  this  sense  the  restraints  of 
caste  did  not  exist,  and  neither  descent  nor  family  ham- 
pered the  rising  of  the  clever"     (20). 

"The  scribe  is  simply  a  man  who  knows  how  to  read 
and  write,  to  draw  up  administrative  formulas,  and  to  cal- 
culate interest.  The  instruction  which  he  has  received  is 
a  necessary  complement  of  his  position  if  he  belong  to  a 
good  family,  whilst  if  he  be  poor  it  enables  him  to  obtain 
a  lucrative  situation  in  the  administration  or  at  the  house 
of  a  wealthy  personage"     (21). 

"Cases  have  been  seen  of  the  son  of  a  peasant  or  of 
a  poor  citizen  commencing  by  booking  the  delivery  of 
bread  or  vegetables  in  some  provincial  office,  and  ending^ 


76  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

after  a  long  and  industrious  career,  by  governing  one-half 
of  Egypt''     (22). 

"The  number  of  persons  of  obscure  origin,  who  in  this 
manner  had  risen  in  a  few  years  to  the  highest  honors,  and 
died  governors  of  provinces  or  ministers  of  Pharaoh,  must 
have  been  considerable.  Their  descendants  followed  in 
their  father's  footsteps,  until  the  day  came  when  royal 
favor  or  an  advantageous  marriage  secured  them  the 
possession  of  an  hereditary  fief  [landed  estate],  and  trans- 
formed the  son  or  grandson  of  a  prosperous  scribe  into  a 
feudal  lord.  It  was  from  people  of  this  class,  and  from  the 
children  of  Pharaoh,  that  the  nobility  was  mostly  re- 
cruited"    (23). 

Likewise  in  Babylonia,  the  slave  "could  become  a 
free  citizen  and  rise  to  the  highest  offices  of  state.  Slav- 
ery was  no  bar  to  his  promotion,  nor  did  it  imprint  any 
•stigma  upon  him"    (24). 

§  35.  —  Religion  was  an  important  factor  in  oriental 
social  economy,  as  it  is  everywhere  after  a  certain  stage 
has  been  reached  in  the  social  process.  Just  here  we  need 
not  specially  refer  to  its  origin.  It  is  a  well  known  fact 
that  all  primitive  people  are  superstitious.  At  a  very  early 
period,  before  the  entrance  upon  settled  life,  all  races  of 
men  acquire  ideas  about  a  supersensuous  world  of  spirits, 
great  and  small.  These  personal  agents,  usually  thought 
to  be  invisible,  are  imagined  as  inhabiting  all  sorts  of 
queer,  out-of-the-way  places,  like  trees,  graves,  mountain 
tops,  the  air,  etc.  They  are  thought  to  be  greatly  inter- 
ested in,  and  affected  by,  the  actions  of  men;  and  the 
primitive  mind  invests  them  with  more  or  less  power  over 
nature  and  over  human  life.  Their  anger  must  be  averted, 
and  their  favor  obtained,  by  means  of  offerings,  petitions, 
and  appropriate  courses  of  conduct. 

The  religious  idea,  like  any  other,  might  remain  a 
mere  idea,  to  survive  or  perish  on  its  merits,  if  it  had  no 
potentiality  of  social  service.  But  anthropology  and  his- 
tory show  that  religion  has  a  most  decided  influence  over 
social  life.    The  primitive  social  group,  after  passing  a  cer- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  77' 

tain  stage  in  its  history,  always  acquires  ideas  not  only  of 
spirits  in  general,  but  of  a  spirit  which  pertains  especially 
to  that  group.  This  spirit  becomes  a  god,  or  divinity,  who 
is  thought  to  be  interested  in  and  affected  by  the  affairs 
of  the  group,  and  who  has  power  to  help  or  hinder ;  whose 
favor  can  be  obtained,  and  whose  anger  can  be  averted, 
by  offerings,  petitions,  and  appropriate  conduct.  We  have 
seen  that  it  is  necessary  that  social  groups  be  as  coherent 
as  possible  in  the  struggle  for  life ;  and  it  is  plain  that  the 
religious  idea  serves  to  cement  the  bonds  that  hold  primi- 
tive societies  together.  In  the  words  of  Professor  W.  R. 
Smith,  primitive  religion  "did  not  exist  for  the  saving  of 
souls  but  for  the  preservation  and  welfare  of  society,  and 
in  all  that  was  necessary  to  this  end  every  man  had  to 
take  his  part  or  break  with  the  domestic  and  political 
community  to  which  he  belonged"  (25).  The  common 
worship  of  a  common  deity,  who  is  thought  to  lead  in  bat- 
tle and  fight  for  his  people,  cannot  but  serve  to  strengthen 
communal  feelings.     In  Assyria,  for  instance,  — 

"Assur  was  supreme  over  all  other  gods,  as  his  repre- 
sentative, the  Assyrian  king,  was  supreme  over  the  other 
kings  of  the  earth.  .  .  It  was  through  ^trust  in  As- 
sur'  that  the  Assyrian  armies  went  forth  to  conquer,  and 
through  his  help  that  they  gained  their  victories.  The 
enemies  of  Assyria  were  his  enemies,  and  it  was  to  combat 
and  overcome  them  that  the  Assyrian  monarchs  declare 
that  they  marched  to  war''     (26). 

§  36.  —  Although  a  god  was  regarded  as  belonging  in 
a  general  sense  to  the  entire  group,  he  was  held  to  be  es- 
pecially the  god  of  the  upper  class.  His  priests  were 
naturally  chosen  from  the  nobility.  Political  and  reli- 
gious headship  were  often  united  in  the  same  person ;  and 
even  when  the  priestly  and  kingly  offices  were  not  identi- 
fied, the  governmental  and  religious  classes  were  closely 
connected.  Religion  and  politics  went  hand  in  hand;  or, 
in  modern  phrase,  church  and  state  were  united. 

As  tribes  coalesced  into  national  groups,  and  settled 
permanently  upon  the  soil,  the  upper  classes  caused  the 


78  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

erection  of  temples  and  the  establishment  of  regular 
priesthoods  and  rituals.  Temples  were  endowed  with 
landed  estates  and  slaves.  In  Egypt,  according  to  Mas- 
pero,  the  territory  of  the  gods  embraced  at  all  periods 
within  historic  times  about  one-third  of  the  whole 
country    (27). 

"Under  the  Middle  and  also  under  the  Old  [Egyptian] 
Empire  each  province  was  the  seat  of  an  ancient  noble 
family,  who  for  generations  inherited  the  government  and 
the  high-priesthood  of  its  temple.  It  is  true  that  these  pro- 
vincial princes  could  only  actually  bequeath  to  their  child- 
ren the  family  estate  and  the  membership  in  the  priestly 
college  of  their  native  temple ;  but  if  there  were  no  special 
circumstances  against  it,  the  Pharaoh  would  always  be- 
stow the  government  on  the  great  landowner  of  the 
province,  and  in  choosing  their  high  priest,  the  [lesser] 
priests  could  scarcely  pass  over  the  richest  and  most  im- 
portant personage  among  them''     (28). 

Thus  it  begins  to  be  evident  that  early  religion  was 
more  than  an  idea  and  a  cult,  and  that  it  was  intimately 
involved  in  the  secular  life  of  society.  As  we  have  pre- 
viously observed,  if  the  religious  idea  had  not  had  poten- 
tiality of  practical  influence  on  society,  it  must  have  re- 
mained a  mere  idea  without  visible  issue;  but  as  it  was, 
the  social  forces  drew  it  down  from  the  cloudland  of  the 
imagination  into  the  center  of  the  great  human  drama; 
and  if  we  do  not  look  sharply  into  the  facts,  we  shall  miss 
the  connection  of  religion  with  real  life. 

Turning  from  Egypt  to  Chaldea,  we  find  that  — 

"The  priests  made  great  profit  out  of  corn  and  metals, 
and  the  skill  with  which  they  conducted  commercial  oper- 
ations in  silver  was  so  notorious  that  no  private  person 
hesitated  to  entrust  them  with  the  management  of  his  capi- 
tal: they  were  the  intermediaries  between  lenders  and 
borrowers,  and  the  commissions  which  they  obtained  in 
these  transactions  were  not  the  smallest  or  the  least  cer- 
tain of  their  profits.  They  maintained  troops  of  slaves, 
laborers,  gardeners,  workmen,     ...     all  of  whom  either 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  79 

worked  directly  for  them  in  their  several  trades  or  were 
let  out  to  those  who  needed  their  services''   (29.) 

"The  worship  of  their  deities  by  the  Babylon- 
ians ....  formed  one  of  the  most  important  as- 
pects of  the  national  life,  and,  as  their  temples  were  the 
largest  of  their  buildings,  so  the  priests  were  the  most 
powerful  class  in  the  community.  In  each  city  the  largest 
and  most  important  temple  was  that  devoted  to  the  city- 
god.  .  .  .  Situated  on  a  lofty  platform  and  rising 
stage  upon  stage,  these  ziggurats  or  temple-towers  domi- 
nated the  surrounding  houses,  and  were  more  imposing 
than  the  royal  palaces  themselves.  At  the  summit  of  each 
the  image  of  the  god  reposed  in  his  shrine,  and  around 
its  base  clustered  the  temple  offices  and  the  dwellings  of 
the  priests.  .  .  .  The  temples  were  under  the  direct 
patronage  of  the  kings,  who  prided  themselves  on  the  re- 
building and  restoration  of  their  fabrics  as  much  as  on  the 
successful  issue  of  their  campaigns,  while  the  priesthood 
were  supported  by  regular  and  appointed  offerings  in  ad- 
dition to  the  revenues  they  drew  from  the  lands  and  pro- 
perty with  which  the  temples  were  endowed.  The  influ- 
ence of  the  priests  upon  the  people  was  exerted  from  many 
sides,  for  not  only  were  they  the  god's  representatives, 
.  .  .  but  they  also  regulated  and  controlled  all  de- 
partments of  life.  They  represented  the  learned  section  of 
the  nation,  and  in  all  probability  the  scribes  belonged  en- 
tirely to  the  priestly  class.  They  composed  and  preserved 
the  national  records,  and  although  some  of  the  later  As- 
syrian kings  collected  libraries  in  their  palaces,  this  was 
probably  accomplished  only  with  the  cooperation  of  the 
priesthood  and  by  drawing  on  the  collection  of  tablets  pre- 
served in  the  great  temples  throughout  the  country"    (30). 

The  priesthood  was,  in  fact,  a  part  of  the  upper  class ; 
and  the  religious  phase  of  social  development  must  be 
studied  principally  from  the  standpoint  of  the  great,  all- 
pervading  institution  of  cleavage. 

Paradoxically  speaking,  the  religious  idea  has  been 
valuable  to  society,  not  for  its  intrinsic  worth  as  an  idea, 


80  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

but  in  the  proportion  that  it  has  lent  itself  to  the  practical^ 
terrestrial  needs  of  real  life.  And  it  has  lent  itself  to 
these  needs  by  functioning  as  a  concrete  structural  no- 
tion upon  which  secular  institutions  can  form  themselves. 
What  is  meant  is,  that  in  studying  religious  history  we 
are  examining  social,  secular  history  under  the  special 
guise  of  religious  history.  The  sooner  we  assimilate  this 
paradoxical  fact,  the  sooner  we  shall  be  prepared  to  begin 
to  understand  the  religious  phase  of  social  evolution.  Re- 
ligion has  been  a  positive  element  in  human  history  in 
the  proportion  that  it  has  been  "materialistic."  We  say 
this,  and  enclose  the  term  in  quotation  points,  in  the  con- 
sciousness that  we  shall  not  improbably  be  misunderstood 
and  misrepresented  in  all  good  faith.  So  long  as  reli- 
gion has  been  involved  in  the  satisfaction  of  some  tangible 
social  need,  just  so  long  has  it  been  a  dramatic  element 
in  the  evolution  of  society.  But  in  the  proportion  that 
these  needs  are  satisfied,  and  religious  institutions  come 
to  represent  merely  the  idea  upon  which  they  are  nomin- 
ally based,  just  in  this  degree  does  religion  cease  to  be  a 
positive,  dramatic  factor  in  society,  and  revert  to  the 
status  of  a  simple  idea,  surviving,  changing,  or  perishing 
strictly  on  its  absolute  merits. 

In  the  present  connection  we  are  concerned  to  empha- 
size that,  given  the  religious  idea  as  a  psychological  fact, 
religious  history  must  be  studied  principally  from  the 
standpoint  of  cleavage. 

Perception  of  this  truth  helps  us  again  to  see  that  the 
upper-class  control  of  any  given  phase  of  society  —  in- 
dustrial, political,  religious,  etc.  —  was  more  or  less  mixed 
up  with  all  kinds  of  social  functions.  Oriental  civiliza- 
tion, as  previously  pointed  out,  represents  a  primitive 
stage  of  social  evolution;  and  all  primitive  social  life, 
as  contrasted  with  modern  society,  is  relatively  indefinite 
and  undifferentiated. 

§  37.  —  We  have  obtained  passing  glimpses  of  ori- 
ental education  in  the  course  of  our  survey.  This  depart- 
ment of  life,  too,  was  in  the  hands  of  the  upper  class. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  81 

The  schools  were  in  charge,  or  under  the  direction,  of  the 
priesthood.  It  was  the  schools  that  fostered  and  ex- 
tended the  beginnings  of  human  learning  —  writing, 
mathematics,  astronomy,  etc.  It  was  the  schools  that 
educated  the  aristocrac}^,  and  freely  trained  poor  child- 
ren of  promising  talents  to  become  useful  members  of  the 
community. 

In  addition  to  the  various  glimpses  of  oriental  in- 
tellectual life  thus  far  obtained,  a  passage  from  Profes- 
sor Rogers'  work  on  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  history  af- 
fords an  instructive  insight : 

^^The  closing  years  of  AsshurbanapaFs  long  and  la- 
borious reign  were  largely  spent  in  works  of  peace.  Even 
during  the  stormy  years  he  had  had  great  interest  in  the 
erection  of  buildings  and  the  collection  and  copying  of 
books  for  his  library.  In  such  congenial  tasks  his  latter 
days  were  chiefly  spent.  .  .  .  The  two  kingdoms  were 
ransacked  for  the  clay  books  which  had  been  written  in 
days  gone  by.  Works  of  grammar,  of  lexicography,  of 
poetry,  history,  science,  and  religion  w^ere  brought  from 
ancient  libraries  in  Babylonia.  They  were  carefully 
copied  in  the  Assyrian  style,  with  notes  descriptive,  chro- 
nological, or  explanatory,  by  the  scholars  of  the  court, 
and  the  copies  were  preserved  in  the  palace,  while  the 
originals  went  back  to  the  place  whence  they  were  bor- 
rowed. The  library  thus  formed  numbered  many  thous- 
ands of  books.  In  it  the  scholars,  whom  Asshurbanapal 
patronized  so  well,  worked  carefully  on  in  the  writing  of 
new  books  on  all  the  range  of  learning  of  the  day.  Out 
of  an  atmosphere  like  that  came  the  records  of  Asshur- 
banapaFs own  reign.  Small  wonder  it  is  that  under  such 
conditions  his  historical  inscriptions  should  be  couched 
in  a  style  finished,  elegant,  and  rhythmical,  with  which 
the  bare  records  of  fact  of  previous  reigns  may  not  be  com- 
pared at  air'   (31). 

Assyria  was  originally  an  off-shoot  from  Babylonia; 
and  it  is  to  the  mother  country  at  a  still  earlier  period  that 
we  must  look  for  more  primitive  stages  of  intellectual  cul- 

6 


82  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ture.  From  the  Persian  Gulf  in  the  east  to  Upper  Egypt 
in  the  west  the  Babylonian  language  was  known  and  used, 
at  least  fifteen  hundred  years  before  Christ,  for  purposes 
of  international  communication.  Babylonian  culture  was 
carried  westward  to  the  Greeks,  who,  in  turn,  did  a  great 
deal  of  the  thinking  upon  which  modern  science  and  cul- 
ture are  based.  Professor  Sayce  has  given  such  a  vivid 
sketch  of  the  oriental  postal  system,  through  which  flowed 
many  of  the  currents  of  intellectual  life,  that  his  account 
should  be  read  in  this  connection. 

^^There  were  excellent  roads  all  over  Western  Asia, 
with  post-stations  at  intervals  where  relays  of  horses  could 
be  procured.  Along  these  all  letters  to  or  from  the  king 
and  the  government  were  carried  by  royal  messengers. 
It  is  probable  that  the  letters  of  private  individuals  were 
also  carried  by  the  same  hands.  The  letters  of  Tel-el- Am- 
arna  give  us  some  idea  of  the  wide  extension  of  the  postal 
system  and  the  ease  with  which  letters  were  constantly 
being  conveyed  from  one  part  of  the  East  to  another. 
The  foreign  correspondence  of  Pharaoh  was  carried  on 
with  Babjdonia  and  Assyria  in  the  east,  Mesopotamia  and 
Cappadocia  in  the  north,  and  Palestine  and  Syria  in  the 
west.  The  civilized  oriental  world  was  thus  bound  to- 
gether by  a  network  of  postal  routes  over  which  literary 
intercourse  was  perpetually  passing.  .  .  .  The  Cana- 
anite  corresponded  with  his  friends  and  neighbors  quite  as 
much  as  the  Babylonian,  and  his  correspondence  was  con- 
ducted in  the  same  language  and  script.  Hiram  of  Tyre, 
in  sending  letters  to  Solomon,  did  but  carry  on  the  tra- 
ditions of  a  distant  past.  Long  before  the  Israelites  en- 
tered Palestine  both  a  foreign  and  an  inland  postal  ser- 
vice had  been  established  there  while  it  was  still  under 
Babylonian  rule.  The  art  of  reading  and  writing  must 
have  been  widely  spread,  and  when  it  is  remembered  that 
for  the  larger  number  of  the  Tel-el- Amarna  writers  the  lan- 
guage and  system  of  writing  which  they  used  were  of  for- 
eign origin,  it  may  be  concluded  that  the  education  given 
at  the  time  was  of  no  despicable  character"     (32). 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  83 

§  38.  —  Our  inquiry  thus  far  has  shown  us  that  ori- 
ental society,  in  every  phase  of  its  life,  was  organized  on 
the  lines  of  cleavage.  This  great  institution  seems  to  be 
wholly  unjust.  It  seems  to  be  wrong  for  an  upper  class 
to  appropriate,  consume,  and  control  the  labor  products 
of  a  lower  class  by  means  of  property  right  of  any  kind. 
But  the  beneficence  of  cleavage  as  a  channel  for  the  dis- 
charge of  evolutionary  force  resolves  the  ethical  problem 
into  a  question  of  relativity.  A  test  of  the  question  is  to 
be  found  in  a  comparison  of  human  life  in  the  stone  age, 
or  among  savages,  and  life  in  the  more  advanced  societies. 
Let  us  frankly  admit  that  great  evils  are  involved  in  civili- 
zation as  well  as  in  the  primitive  struggle  for  existence. 
We  have  to  inquire,  first,  whether  the  greatest  good  of  the 
greatest  number  is  better  conserved,  on  the  whole,  by  prim- 
itive conditions  or  by  historic  conditions.  Do  primitive 
conditions  have  a  greater  potency  for  human  happiness 
than  historic  conditions?  Or  do  the  latter  involve  more 
actual  and  possible  good  than  the  former? 

A  careful  study  of  the  primitive  struggle  for  exist- 
ence, as  contrasted  with  the  conditions  thus  far  brought 
out  in  our  scrutiny  of  ancient  civilization,  cannot  fail,  we 
think,  to  show  the  superiority  of  the  historic  over  the  more 
primitive  stage  of  human  evolution.  The  upper  class  prac- 
tically owned  the  lower  class,  and  appropriated  its  labor 
without  engaging  to  make  repayment.  There  was  no  give 
and  take  between  equals.  But  the  upper  class  did  not 
simply  consume  its  appropriations  in  idle  luxury.  If 
cleavage  had  merely  provided  for  the  parasitic  exploita- 
tion of  the  lower  class,  then  the  social  groups  wherein  it 
became  a  factor  must  apparently  have  been  swept  aside  in 
prehistoric  times.*    The  societies  that  have  emerged  from 

*  Mr.  Lester  F.  Ward,  who  has  done  so  much  good  work  in  sociology, 
seems  to  have  gone  astray  on  the  subject  of  class  relations.  •  In  his 
Dynamic  Sociology  he  identifies  the  parasitic-leisure  class  with  the 
upper  class  of  all  history.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  parasitism  is  only  an 
involution  of  the  upper-class  control  of  society.  When  settled  society 
increases  in  population,  the  perfecting  of  land  monopoly  makes  the  subjec- 


84  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  terrific  struggles  of  the  prehistoric  age,  and  made 
progress  in  civilization,  have  invariably  exhibited  the 
phenomenon  of  cleavage.  This  book  is  not  a  blind  apology 
for  cleavage,  but  a  protest  against  blind  attacks  on  a  great 
historic  institution,  and  a  plea  for  middle  ground.  The 
universe,  as  a  whole  and  in  all  its  details,  so  far  as  we 
know  it,  is  a  manifestation  of  opposed  "forces,"  or  "ten- 
dencies." Human  society,  as  a  cosmic  fact,  falls  under 
the  reign  of  this  law;  and  it  must  be  approached  with 
this  truth  in  view  if  we  are  to  begin  to  comprehend  the 
social  problem.  Although  the  lower  class  received  no  di- 
rect, immediately  apparent,  economic  return  for  its  labor, 
it  received  a  large  return  indirectly.  In  the  more  primi- 
tive, animal  period,  life  was  precarious,  food  uncertain, 
clothing  and  shelter  insufficient,  ignorance  universal. 
But  the  advance  of  the  evolutionary  process  into  settled 
life  included  all  concerned  in  a  growing  social  system 
which  at  first,  on  the  whole,  brought  more  good  than  evil 
—  more  actual  good,  and  more  possibilities  of  good,  than 
men  had  known  before.  The  upper  class  controlled  the 
labor  of  the  lower  class  under  unequal  terms.  But  cleav- 
age actively  enlisted  the  egoism  of  the  upper  class  in  the 
tremendous  work  of  social  development.  A  large  part  of 
the  appropriated  labor  of  the  masses  was  converted  into 
the  material  and  spiritual  tools  whereby  humanity  con- 
quers its  environment  and  struggles  upward  along  the 
path  of  progress.  It  was  material  tools,  knowledge,  men- 
tal training,  organization  —  in  other  words,  capital  in  the 
largest  sense  —  that  early  prehistoric  man  lacked  and 
needed.  It  is  material  and  spiritual  capital  with  which  to 
develop  nature's  resources  that  man  must  have  if  he  is  to 

tion  of  the  lower  class  more  complete,  and  throws  the  incidental  parasitism 
of  the  upper  class  out  into  ever  bolder  relief.  This,  however,  is  a  prob- 
lem by  itself.  It  is  illustrated  eventually  in  the  life  of  all  settled  society. 
But  the  total  significance  of  cleavage  should  not  be  tested  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  evils  developed  in  connection  with  it.  These  do  not 
control  the  entire  perspective  by  any  means. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  85 

rise  above  primitive  levels.  Development  is  the  outcome 
of  reactions  between  organism  and  environment.  The 
higher  evolution  of  mankind  has  come  with  the  physical 
and  intellectual  appropriation  of  their  environment.  The 
degree  in  which  we  appropriate  our  environment,  phys- 
ically and  intellectually,  is  the  measure  of  our  civilization. 
It  is  impossible  for  large  numbers  of  men  to  affiliate  in 
society  without  vast  and  various  capital.  The  beginnings 
of  material  progress  began  to  supply  a  small  amount  of 
capital,  probably  on  the  individualistic  basis.  But  mater- 
ial progress,  by  producing  a  surplus  in  the  midst  of  the 
primitive  struggle  for  existence,  issued  in  social  cleavage ; 
and  this  institution  had  the  effect  of  a  forced  draught  on 
a  smoldering  fire.  In  the  resulting  civilization,  life  be- 
came surer,  the  production  of  food  steadier  and  more  ex- 
tensive, and  the  preparation  of  clothing  and  shelter  more 
satisfactory,  than  in  the  earlier  period.  By  promoting  the 
growth  of  capital,  the  upper  class  unconsciously  served 
the  lower  class,  and  forced  the  different  sections  of  the 
humble  folk  to  serve  each  other.  Civilization,  to  all  out- 
ward appearance,  is  based  on  exploitation;  but  in  its 
deepest  essence,  it  is  founded  on  the  law  of  service.  Cleav- 
age is  a  paradoxical  involution  of  the  law  of  service. 

§  39.  —  But,  having  studied  cleavage  in  the  oriental 
world  thus  far  with  reference  to  its  beneficent  aspects,  it 
is  necessary  at  this  point  for  us  to  emphasize  the  opposite 
side  of  the  paradox.  At  length  its  abuses,  never  absent, 
began  palpably  to  outweigh  its  benefits.  As  tribes  took  up 
definite  homes,  and  formed  settled  nations  and  empires, 
the  upper  classes  reached  out  and  slowly  absorbed  the 
soil.  Population  steadily  multiplied,  and  thus  increased 
the  demand  for,  and  the  value  of,  land.  The  growing 
monopoly  of  the  soil  gave  the  superior  class  a  not  less 
powerful,  but  far  more  subtle,  hold  upon  the  masses  than 
did  slavery.  The  masses,  being  in  complete  economic 
dependence,  and  without  popular  political  institutions 
through  which  to  express  their  wants,  lost  interest  and 
vigor.     The  upper  class,  with  its  increasing  wealth  and 


86  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

luxury,  became  effeminate  and  morally  corrupt,  having 
never  had  an  intelligent  understanding  of  its  public,  or 
social,  function,  and  being  wholly  incapable  of  solving  the 
problem  which  brought  advancing  civilization  to  a  stand. 
Egypt,  Babylonia,  Assyria,  Phoenicia,  and  Israel  sank  into 
mysterious  decline  in  their  ancient  seats;  and  the  proud 
oriental  civilization  began  more  and  more  to  succumb  to 
the  shock  of  assault  from  without.  New  races  came  crowd- 
ing upon  the  scene  —  Elamites,  Kasshites,  Ethiopians, 
Scythians,  Medes,  Persians,  Greeks,  and  Komans.  It 
would  seem  that  oriental  society,  having  waxed  powerful 
up  to  a  certain  stage,  ought  to  have  repelled  these  enemies 
instead  of  offering  a  weaker  and  weaker  front  to  their 
assaults.  But  the  contrary  was  the  case;  and  the  genius 
of  progress  at  length  departed  from  the  eastern  world. 
§  40.  —  Before  carrying  the  development  of  our  main 
thesis  further  it  is  necessary  to  look  more  closely  into  the 
great  problem  which  oriental  civilization  failed  to  solve. 
This  can  be  attempted  to  best  effect  in  connection  with  a 
somewhat  detailed  study  of  that  interesting  oriental  peo- 
ple known  generally  as  "Israel."  The  Israelites  bred  a 
line  of  preachers,  or  "prophets,''  who  made  the  first  dra- 
matic attempt  in  human  history  to  cope  with  the  social 
problem,  and  who  have  profoundly  influenced  later 
thought.*  As  Kenan  justly  says,  it  is  through  prophecy 
that  Israel  occupies  a  place  in  the  history  of  the 
world  (33).  In  order  to  study  Israel  and  the  prophets 
it  is  necessary  to  make  what  will  here  seem,  at  first,  like 
an  unwarranted  digression.  This  turning  aside,  however, 
will  serve  not  only  to  illustrate  the  nature  of  the  problem 
which  oriental  society  encountered,  and  which  every  civi- 
lization is  compelled  sooner  or  later  to  face;  but  it  will 
bring  out  with  even  greater  emphasis  the  relation  of  cleav- 
age to  history,  as  well  as  make  intelligible  some  of  the 

*  The  English  word  "prophet"  meant  primarily  a  preacher,  not  simply 
a  predictor;  although  a  predictive  element  might  enter  the  preaching  of 
the  prophet;  and  the  Hebrew  term  which  it  represents  is  to  be  taken  in 
this  general  sense.    Of  this,  however,  more  later. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  87 

later  developments  of  our  subject.  Our  general  thesis 
forces  us  to  examine  the  nature  of  this  problem,  since  it 
is  out  of  attempts  to  solve  it  that  some  of  the  later  insti- 
tutions of  the  oriental,  classic,  and  western  societies  take 
their  origin.  Our  thesis  opens  up  one  side  of  a  paradox 
which  must  be  treated  from  both  sides  if  our  examination 
of  society  is  to  reach  the  most  intelligible  results.  How- 
ever, since  this  proposition  is  anticipative  its  force  does 
not  become  fully  evident  at  this  early  stage  of  the  inquiry. 

§  41.  —  It  should  be  observed  at  the  outset  that  Israel 
was  a  late  comer  among  the  ancient  nations.  The  great 
peoples  of  oriental  civilization  had  reached  perhaps  the 
height  of  their  culture  while  yet  the  ancestors  of  the  Is- 
raelites were  wandering  barbarians  in  the  desert.  The 
"children  of  Israel"  came  forward  into  the  light  of  history 
during  their  conquest  and  settlement  of  a  strip  of  terri- 
tory on  the  eastern  seaboard  of  the  Mediterranean.  We 
have  learned  that  the  passage  from  barbarism  to  civiliza- 
tion is  always  attended  by  the  permanent  occupation  of 
some  definite  territory;  and  we  are  thus  prepared  to  see 
that  the  Israelite  conquest  of  Canaan  was  a  normal,  not 
an  extraordinary,  event  in  history. 

§  42.  —  We  have  but  little  trustworthy  information 
touching  the  details  of  Israelitish  history  before  the  time 
of  the  Conquest.  Like  other  ancient  peoples,  they  de- 
veloped a  mass  of  myth  and  legend  in  the  effort  to  account 
for  their  origin.  Modern  research,  however,  leaves  no 
doubt  as  to  their  proximate  origin,  at  least.  They  were 
simply  one  of  the  families  of  the  great  Semitic  race ;  and, 
like  other  nations,  they  came  forward  into  the  light  of 
history  out  of  prehistoric  barbarism.  Just  as  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  people  of  the  United  States,  Canada,  Australia,  and 
New  Zealand  are  descended  principally  from  English  fore- 
fathers, so  the  Israelites,  in  common  with  the  Moabites, 
Edomites,  Ammonites,  Phoenicians,  Arameans,  Arabs, 
Babylonians,  Assyrians,  and  other  oriental  peoples,  were 
derived  partly  or  wholly  from  prehistoric  barbarian  Sem- 
ites, who  had  swarmed  out  in  successive  waves  from  their 


88  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

earlier  homeland  (probably  Arabia),  and  overspread  the 
ancient  eastern  world.  According  to  Genesis  19  and  30, 
even  the  legends  of  Israel  recognize  the  kinship  of  the  Is- 
raelites with  the  Moabites,  Edomites,  and  Ammonites ;  and 
chapters  11  and  15  of  the  same  book  speak  of  the  ancestors 
of  this  people  as  immigrants  from  the  country  of  Chaldea. 
The  Israelites  used  practically  the  same  language  and  sys- 
tem of  writing  as  their  neighbors,  and  had  no  difficulty  in 
coming  verbally  to  terms  with  them. 

This  people,  then,  was  not  a  nation  apart.  The  Is- 
raelites belonged  to  one  of  the  great  races  of  mankind; 
and  came  forward  on  the  stage  of  history,  like  all  historic 
nations,  through  the  tumult  of  war  and  conquest     (34). 

§  43.  —  Critical  study  of  the  canonic  literature  of  Is- 
rael (the  Old  Testament)  shows  that  its  beginnings  were 
made  in  Semitic  heathenism;  and  that  after  the  Israel- 
ites had  developed  a  purer  form  of  religion,  a  higher 
stratum  of  writings  was  laid  over  the  earlier;  while  the 
foundation  literature  itself  was,  to  some  extent,  edited  in  a 
sincere  effort  to  harmonize  it  with  the  later  developments. 
The  adjustment  of  the  heathen  writings  to  the  newer  faith, 
hovv^ever,  was  not  the  outcome  of  a  perfectly  coordinated 
effort  or  series  of  efforts.  There  was  no  absolute  unity 
of  plan  in  the  production  and  the  arrangement  of  the 
literature;  and  the  Old  Testament  is,  in  fact,  a  loose  col- 
lection of  books  by  many  authors  and  editors.  The  books 
themselves  are,  in  many  instances,  logically  and  chrono- 
logically out  of  place;  and  scholarship  encounters  little 
difficulty  in  restoring  at  least  the  essential  outlines  of  the 
history  and  religious  development  of  this  interesting  ori- 
ental people. 

The  general  position  of  modern  Biblical  scholarship 
is  well  described  in  the  following  words  of  Professor  0. 
H.  Cornill  of  Konigsberg,  an  expert  of  the  first  rank : 

"At  the  time  when  the  historical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  put  into  the  final  form  in  which  they  now 
lie  before  us,  during  and  after  the  Babylonish  exile,  the 
past  was  no  longer  understood.    Men  were  ashamed  of  it. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  89 

They  could  not  understand  that  in  the  days  of  old  all  had 
been  so  completely  different,  and  therefore  did  all  in  their 
power  to  erase  and  blot  out  of  their  accounts  of  the  past 
whatever  at  this  later  date  might  be  a  cause  of  offence. 
In  the  same  manner  the  Arabs,  after  their  conversion  to 
Islam,  purposely  obliterated  all  traces  of  the  era  of  "folly," 
as  they  termed  the  pre-Islamitic  period  of  their  existence, 
so  that  it  gives  one  the  greatest  difficulty  to  get  in  any 
wise  a  clear  picture  of  the  early  Arabic  paganism.  The 
history  of  the  German  nation  has  also  an  analogous  spec- 
tacle to  show  in  the  blind  and  ill-advised  zeal  of  the  Chris- 
tian converts  who  systematically  destroyed  the  old  pagan 
literature,  which  a  man  like  Charles  the  Great  had  gath- 
ered together  with  such  love  and  appreciation.  This, 
luckily,  the  men  to  whom  we  owe  the  compilation  and  final 
redaction  of  the  ancient  Israelitish  literature  did  not  do; 
they  were  satisfied  with  emendations  and  corrections,  and 
left  enough  standing  to  afford,  at  least  to  the  trained  eye 
of  the  modern  critic,  a  sufficient  groundwork  for  unravel- 
ing tHe  truth.  The  newest  phase  of  Old  Testament  in- 
vestigation has  succeeded  in  raising  this  veil,  now  more 
than  two  thousand  years  old,  and  through  an  act  similar 
to  that  of  Copernicus,  by  w^hich,  so  to  speak,  the  narrative 
was  turned  upside  down,  has  brought  out  the  real  his- 
torical truth"   (35). 

It  is  almost  unnecessary  to  add  that  the  life  of  Israel, 
in  every  phase  and  throughout  its  whole  extent,  must  be 
studied  not  only  by  the  help  of  the  canonical  and  uncanoni- 
cal  books  of  that  people,  but  in  the  light  of  evidence  de- 
rived from  the  nations  with  which  Israel  came  into  con- 
tact, as  well  as  in  view  of  truths  derived  from  the  study  of 
mankind  in  general. 

§  44.  —  By  w  ay  of  preliminary  to  a  survey  of  the  so- 
cial history  of  the  Israelites  we  must  obtain  a  view  of 
their  early  religion;  and  before  this,  in  turn,  must  come 
notice  of  the  origin  and  nature  of  primitive  religion  in 
general. 


90  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

It  has  been  well  said  that  while  there  are  some  savage 
tribes  which  apparently  have  no  religion,  there  are  no 
savages  without  ghosts  or  superstitions  of  some  kind.  We 
have  already  observed  that  practically  the  entire  human 
race  has  some  idea,  more  or  less  definite,  of  a  mysterious, 
unseen  personal  world,  which  in  some  way  influences  hu- 
man life.  This  persuasion  may  exist  unformulated 
among  the  most  backward,  or  it  may  be  developed  into 
definite  doctrines  and  practices  among  the  more  progres- 
sive races;  but  in  its  essentials  it  is  everywhere  based  on 
the  same  foundations;  and  it  everywhere  constitutes  the 
backbone  of  religious  development.  The  general  question 
here  is.  How  did  religion  start?  This  has  been  fully  and 
conclusively  answered  by  modern  investigators;  and  we 
do  not  need  to  go  into  the  subject  at  any  length  in  this 
connection.  It  will  be  sufficient  to  give  a  sketch  of  the  re- 
sults attained  by  expert  students  of  the  problem. 

§  45.  —  It  is  well  known  that  children  believe  dreams 
to  be  actual  events.  They  are  unable  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  subjective  dream  world  and  the  objective  world 
of  reality.  A  little  boy  of  the  writer's  acquaintance  once 
persisted  in  declaring  that  he  had  killed  a  cow.  Older 
people  thought  he  was  telling  an  untruth.  The  probability 
is,  that  he  had  dreamed  of  killing  a  cow.  Doubtless  many 
of  the  falsehoods  of  little  people  are  equally  innocent.  We 
know,  in  the  same  w^ay,  from  the  independent  testimony 
of  responsible  travelers  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  that  sav- 
ages mistake  dreams  for  actual  happenings.  Mr.  Im 
Thurn,  a  traveler  in  British  Guiana,  relates  a  case  in 
point,  which  gives  an  interesting  glimpse  into  primitive 
psychology. 

"One  morning  when  it  was  important  to  get  away 
from  a  camp  on  the  Essequibo  River,  at  which  I  had  been 
detained  for  some  days  by  the  illness  of  some  of  my  In- 
dian companions,  I  found  that  one  of  the  invalids,  a  young 
Macusi  Indian,  though  better  in  health  was  so  enraged 
against  me  that  he  refused  to  stir;  for  he  declared  that, 
with  great  want  of  consideration  for  his  weak  health,  I 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  91 

had  taken  him  out  during  the  night,  and  had  made  him 
drag  the  canoe  up  a  series  of  difficult  cataracts.  Nothing 
could  persuade  him  of  the  fact  that  this  was  but  a  dream. 

At  that  time  we  were  all  suffering  from  a  great 
scarcity  of  food.  .  .  .  Morning  after  morning  the  In- 
dians declared  that  some  absent  man,  whom  they  named, 
had  visited  their  hammocks  during  the  night,  and  had 
beaten  or  otherwise  maltreated  them;  and  they  always 
insisted  upon  much  rubbing  of  the  supposed  bruised  parts 
of  their  bodies"  (36). 

In  accordance  with  these  facts,  then,  dreams  are  not 
dreams  to  the  primitive  mind,  but  real,  objective  events. 

The  inconsistencies  between  dream  life  and  real  life 
are  reconciled  by  a  rude  and  easy  philosophy.  In  the 
visions  of  the  night  the  primitive  man  goes  far  afield, 
hunts,  feasts,  and  fights.  But  at  length  he  learns  that 
these  events  take  place  while  his  body  is  lying  quietly 
in  the  hut  or  cave  where  he  sleeps.  His  wife  has  been 
awake,  perhaps,  for  some  time,  stirring  the  fire,  watching 
and  listening,  when  he  suddenly  comes  to  consciousness 
and  tells  her  that  he  has  just  been  away  on  a  long  jour- 
ney. But  she  replies  that  she  has  been  awake,  and  that 
he  has  been  sleeping  by  the  fire,  and  has  not  been  away  at 
all.  Then,  still  more  bewildering,  the  primitive  man  seqs, 
among  the  companions  of  his  dreams,  not  only  the  faces 
of  the  living,  but  the  moving  forms  of  old  friends  that  he 
knows  to  be  long  dead  and  buried  in  the  earth.  What 
more  natural  than  that  there  should  at  length  arise  among 
prehistoric  men  the  idea  that  the  body  possesses  a  ghostly 
or  air-like  double,  an  independent  duplicate,  free  to  roam 
about  while  the  body  itself  sleeps  or  crumbles  into  dust? 
To  the  primitive  mind,  this  rude  philosophy  explains  the 
facts.  We  find  it  everywhere  among  mankind.  The  primi- 
tive man,  after  acquiring  the  ghost  philosophy,  would  re- 
late in  all  seriousness  how,  when  lying  down  to  sleep,  he 
"went  away  from  himself,''  and  then  after  a  while  "came 
back  to  himself.''  And  thus  we,  his  descendants,  using  the 
same  phrases,  speak  of  "losing  ourselves"  when  going  to 


92  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

sleep,  and  of  "coming  to  ourselves'^  when  awakening.  The 
primitive  form  of  words  remains,  but  emptied  of  its  long 
forgotten  meaning. 

§  46.  —  An  unimportant  person  would  be  forgotten  in 
later  generations  of  prehistoric  men,  just  as  the  mass  of 
men  perish  out  of  human  memory  now.  But  the  decease 
of  a  clan  father,  or  of  a  tribal  chief,  was  an  important 
event.  The  worship  of  the  dead  is  widespread  among 
primitive  races.  Offerings  of  food  are  made  at  the  grave 
or  tomb,  or  before  the  prepared  corpse.  The  philosophy 
of  these  offerings  is  a  part  of  the  primitive  ghost  philos- 
ophy. Not  only  men,  but  things,  are  seen  in  dreams. 
Therefore,  not  only  do  men  have  ghostly  doubles,  but  in- 
animate things  also  have  ghostly  replicas.  Upon  the  death 
of  an  important  personage,  the  living  made  haste,  then,  to 
offer  him  nourishment  in  order  that  his  spirit  might  enjoy 
the  ghostly  part  of  the  food. 

§  47.  —  Since  all  the  important  persons  in  society 
are  never  of  equal  influence  or  importance,  it  follows  that 
the  ghosts  which  the  primitive  man  worshipped  were  not 
all  on  the  same  level.  First,  there  would  naturally  be  the 
worship  of  the  ancestors  of  the  smaller  family  circles. 
This  is  well  represented  today  by  the  Chinese,  for  instance, 
with  their  "ancestral  tablets."  In  ancient  history  the 
Komans,  with  their  "Lares  and  Penates,''  or  little  family 
gods,  are  a  good  illustration.  Concerning  these,  Mommsen 
writes : 

"Of  all  the  worships  of  Rome  that  which  perhaps  had 
the  deepest  hold  was  the  worship  of  the  tutelary  spirits 
that  presided  in  and  over  the  household  and  the  store- 
chamber:  these  were  in  public  worship  Vesta  and  the 
Penates,  in  family  worship  the  gods  of  forest  and  field, 
the  Silvani,  and  above  all  the  gods  of  the  household  in 
the  strict  sense,  the  Lases  or  Lares,  to  whom  their  share  of 
the  famil}^  meal  was  regularly  assigned,  and  before  whom 
it  was,  even  in  the  time  of  Cato  the  Elder,  the  first  duty 
of  the  father  of  the  household  on  returning  home  to  per- 
form his  devotions.    In  the  ranking  of  the  gods,  however, 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  93: 

these  spirits  of  the  house  and  of  the  field  occupied  the 
lowest  rather  than  the  highest  place''   (37). 

§  48.  —  Above  the  little  family  gods  came  the  larger 
gods  of  the  clan,  or  group  of  families;  and  of  the  tribe, 
or  association  of  clans;  and  of  the  nation,  or  union  of 
tribes.  These  more  important  deities  were  derived  from 
chiefs  and  kings  —  prehistoric  Napoleons,  and  Julius. 
Caesars,  and  Alexanders. 

Attention  to  the  worship  and  food  of  a  dead  chief  or 
king,  who  had  led  his  people  successfully  in  war,  guaran- 
teed the  post-mortem  continuance  of  the  help  and  leader- 
ship which  he  had  given  during  his  lifetime.  In  conflicts 
with  their  foes,  his  people  would  call  upon  his  name,  and 
encourage  each  other  in  the  thought  that  he  was  still  pres- 
ent, helping  them  and  hindering  their  enemies.  This  would 
naturally  stimulate  them  to  do  their  best.  If  success  came, 
or  if  any  unusual  natural  phenomenon  helped  them  and 
hindered  their  enemies,  it  would  confirm  their  devotion 
to  the  spirit  of  the  dead  chief.  If  they  failed  in  battle 
and  were  permanently  conquered,  this  proved,  not  that 
the  worship  of  dead  chiefs  in  general  was  wrong,  but  that 
the  worship  of  that  particular  dead  chief  was  not  a  pay- 
ing institution. 

Thus  the  primitive  mind  evolved  a  belief  which,  in 
the  case  of  a  conquering  tribe  or  nation,  was  always  held 
to  prove  itself.  The  belief  was  a  mental  factor  in  mater- 
ial success ;  while  material  success,  in  turn,  strengthened 
belief  in  the  power  of  the  dead  leader's  ghost  and  extended 
his  worship.  The  primitive  mind  was  never  skeptical 
about  religion  as  a  general  proposition.  It  was  only 
particular,  concrete  religions  that  excited  skepticism. 
The  question  was  "Does  it  pay?"  And  the  answer  to  this,^ 
in  turn,  depended  upon  circumstances  which  the  primi- 
tive mind  interpreted  after  a  fashion  of  its  own. 

§  49.  —  The  gods  were  not  at  first  thought  of  as  crea- 
tors. They  were  merely  translated  men,  very  powerful 
and  somewhat  capricious  beings,  reflecting  the  passions 
of  belligerent  humanity,  and,  like  men,  largely  concerned 


^4  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

with  war.  There  was  not  at  first  any  idea  of  one  supreme 
and  only  God,  for  conditions  during  the  earlier  stages 
of  social  development  were  unfavorable  to  such  a  magni- 
ficent conception. 

§  50.  —  Primitive  religion,  then,  is  intensely  social 
and  practical.  Its  nature  has  been  so  well  set  forth  by 
Professor  W.  R.  Smith  that  we  reproduce  the  following 
passages  from  his  work  on  the  early  religion  of  the  Sem- 
ites : 

"The  circle  into  which  a  man  was  born  was  not 
simply  a  group  of  kinsfolk  and  fellow-citizens,  but  em- 
braced also  certaiti  divine  beings,  the  gods  of  the  family 
and  of  the  state,  which  to  the  ancient  mind  were  as  much 
a  part  of  the  particular  community  with  which  they  stood 
connected  as  the  human  members  of  the  social  circle. 
The  relation  between  the  gods  of  antiquity  and  their  wor- 
shippers was  expressed  in  the  language  of  human  rela- 
tionship, and  this  language  was  not  taken  in  a  figura- 
tive sense  but  with  strict  literality.  If  a  god  was  spoken 
of  as  father  and  his  worshippers  as  his  offspring,  the 
meaning  was  that  the  worshippers  were  literally  of  his 
stock,  that  he  and  they  made  up  one  natural  family  with 
reciprocal  family  duties  to  one  another.  .  .  .  The 
social  body  was  not  made  up  of  men  only,  but  of  gods 
and  men.  .  .  .  Religion  [existed]  for  the  preservation 
and  welfare  of  society,  and  in  all  that  was  necessary  to 
this  end  every  man  had  to  take  his  part,  or  break  with  the 
domestic  and  political  community  to  which  he  be- 
longed"    (38). 

§  51.  —  The  use  of  idols,  or  images,  in  religion  grows 
out  of  customs  connected  with  the  corpses  of  great  men. 
On  this  point  we  reproduce  a  passage  from  Mr.  Grant 
Allen : 

"The  earliest  Idols  .  .  .  are  not  idols  at  all  — 
not  images  or  representations  of  the  dead  person,  but 
actual  bodies,  preserved  and  mummified.  These  pass 
readily,  however,  into  various  types  of  representative 
figures.     For  in  the  first  place  the  mummy  itself  is  usu- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  95 

ally  wrapped  round  in  swathing-clothes  which  obscure  its 
features ;  and  in  the  second  place  it  is  frequently  enclosed 
in  a  wooden  mummy-case,  which  is  itself  most  often 
rudely  human  in  form,  and  which  has  undoubtedly  given 
rise  to  certain  forms  of  idols.  Thus  the  images  of  Amun, 
Khem,  Osiris  and  Ptah  among  Egyptian  gods  are  fre- 
quently or  habitually  those  of  a  mummy  in  a  mummy-case. 
But  furthermore,  the  mummy  itself  is  seldom  or  never  the 
entire  man;  the  intestines  at  least  have  been  removed, 
or  even,  as  in  New  Guinea,  the  entire  mass  of  flesh,  leav- 
ing only  the  skin  and  skeleton.  The  eyes,  again,  are 
often  replaced,  as  in  Peru,  by  some  other  imitative  ob- 
ject, so  as  to  keep  up  the  lifelike  appearance.  Cases  like 
these  lead  on  to  others,  where  the  image  or  idol  gradually 
supersedes  altogether  the  corpse  or  mummy.  .  .  . 
Landa  says  of  the  Yucatanese  that  they  cut  off  the  heads 
of  the  ancient  lords  of  Cocom  when  they  died,  and 
cleared  them  from  flesh  by  cooking  them;  then  they 
sawed  off  the  top  of  the  skull,  filled  in  the  rest  of  the  head 
with  cement,  and  making  the  face  as  like  as  possible 
to  the  original  possessor,  kept  these  images  along  with  the 
statues  and  the  ashes.  Note  here  the  preservation  of  the 
head  as '  exceptionally  sacred.  In  other  cases  they  made 
for  their  fathers  wooden  statues,  put  in  the  ashes  of  the 
burnt  body,  and  attached  the  skin  of  the  occiput  taken 
off  the  corpse.  These  images,  half  mummy,  half  idol, 
were  kept  in  the  oratories  of  their  houses,  and  were 
greatly  reverenced  and  assiduously  cared  for.  On  all  the 
festivals,  food  and  drink  were  offered  to  them.  .  .  . 
At  a  further  stage  ...  we  come  upon  the  image  pure 
and  simple"   (39). 

Thus  we  see  that  idols,  in  their  origin,  are  not  re- 
garded as  having  power  in  and  of  themselves.  They  are 
simply  representative. 

§  52.  —  Among  primitive  peoples  life  after  death  is 
not  regarded  with  satisfaction.  It  is  thought  to  be  a 
negative  existence,  dragged  out  in  dark  and  gloomy 
regions    below    ground  —  the    chill    underworld    of    the 


96  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

shades.  It  is  here  that  most  people  are  thought  to  go  after 
death;  and  here  they  exist  in  the  twilight  gloom.  Only 
the  gods  and  special  sijirits  live  above  ground;  although 
even  they  are  supposed  occasionally  to  visit  the  abodes  of 
the  dead.  Witches,  wizards,  and  necromancers  are  per- 
sons who  are  thought  to  be  able  to  converse  with  the 
spirits,  to  bring  them  up  temporarily,  and  hence  to  act  as 
mediums  between  the  living  and  the  dead. 

§  53.  —  Strange  as  it  still  seems  to  many  people,  the 
religion  of  Israel  at  the  outset,  as  w^ell  as  for  several  cen- 
turies after  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  is  not  to  be  regarded  as 
essentially  unlike  the  religions  of  other  primitive  peoples. 
This  is  now,  indeed,  a  commonplace  of  historical  science. 
Continuing  our  apparent  digression,  let  us  glance  at  the 
early  religion  of  Israel. 

§  54.  —  At  the  time  of  their  entrance  into  Canaan, 
the  associated  tribes  of  Israel,  in  their  character  as  a  na- 
tion, acknowledged  the  over-lordship  of  only  one  deity. 
In  the  fourth  verse  of  the  sixty-eighth  Psalm,  we  find  the 
first  syllable  of  his  name,  given  as  accurately  as  it  can 
be  rendered  in  a  modern  Aryan  tongue,  thus :  "jah."  The 
syllable  is  pronounced  as  in  the  word  "hallelujah,"  which 
means,  "Give  praise  to  Yah,''  or  "Praise  Yah."  We  fre- 
quently find  this  name-syllable  as  an  element  in  the  names 
of  Israelitish  characters.  'For  instance:  Elijah,  or  Eli- 
yah;  Isaiah,  or  Isayah;  Hezekiah,  or  Hezekyah.  The 
more  familiar  "Jehovah,"  or  "Jahovah,"  was  introduced 
in  the  sixteenth  century  by  a  monk  named  Galatinus,  who 
got  this  incorrect  form  by  combining  the  consonants  of 
the  full  name  of  Israel's  national  god  with  the  vowels  of 
the  Hebrew  common  noun  "adoni,"  or  "edonai,"  which 
means  "lord."  The  more  correct  form  is  partially  as  given 
in  Psalm  68 ;  that  is  "Yah,"  or,  in  full,  "Yahweh." 

§  55.  —  This  notice  of  the  verbal  symbol  for  the  Is- 
raelite national  god  is  preliminary  to  a  view  of  Yahweh 
himself  in  his  original  character.  Just  as  Israel  was  only 
one  people  among  the  other  peoples  of  the  earth,  so  Yah- 
weh was  at  first  regarded  as  a  god  among  other  gods.    He 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  97 

was  thought  to  be,  not  the  only  God  in  the  universe,  but 
simply  the  national  god  of  Israel.  His  original  character 
in  this  respect  comes  out  with  startling  distinctness  in  sev- 
eral passages  belonging  to  what  we  have  called  the  "foun- 
dation literature'-  of  the  Old  Testament.  Thus,  in  Judges 
11 :  23,  24,  certain  words  are  put  in  the  mouth  of  Jeptha, 
one  of  the  so  called  "judges"  of  Israel,  in  which  he  ad- 
dresses the  king  of  the  Ammonites  as  follows:  "So  now 
Yahweh,  the  god  of  Israel,  hath  dispossessed  the  Amorites 
from  before  his  people  Israel,  and  shouldst  thou  possess 
them?  Wilt  thou  not  possess  that  which  Chemosh  thy 
god  giveth  thee  to  possess?  So  whomsoever  Yahweh,  our 
god,  hath  dispossessed  from  before  us,  them  will  we 
possess."  Here,  a  foreign  god  is  clearly  recognized  as  con- 
quering territory  for  his  people,  just  as  Yahweh  conquers 
territory  for  the  Israelites.  The  passage  seems  to  make 
a  mistake  in  associating  the  god  Chemosh  with  the  Ammon- 
ites, for  the  god  of  Ammon  was  Milcom  (1  Kings  11:5, 
33 ;  2  Kings  23 :  13).  Chemosh  was  the  god  of  the  neigh- 
boring Moabites,  as  in  Numbers  21 :  29 :  "Woe  unto  thee, 
Moab!  Thou  art  undone,  O  people  of  Chemosh:  He 
[Chemosh]  hath  given  his  sons  as  fugitives,  and  his  daugh- 
ters into  captivity,  unto  Sihon,  King  of  the  Amorites." 
This  passage,  like  the  other,  admits  the  reality  and  power 
of  a  foreign  god. 

A  more  familiar  illustration  of  the  same  idea  is  found 
in  the  first  chapter  of  the  book  of  Ruth.  An  Israelite, 
named  Elimelech,  had  gone  over  into  the  country  of  Moab 
with  his  wife  Naomi  and  his  two  sons.  The  sons  took  wives 
of  the  women  of  Moab.  After  a  time  the  father  and  sons 
died,  leaving  Naomi  with  her  two  daughters-in-law.  Na- 
omi now  decided  to  leave  Moab  and  return  to  her  old 
home  in  Israel.  When  she  set  out,  her  daughters-in-law 
started  to  go  with  her.  But  Naomi  expostulated  with 
them,  advising  them  to  remain  in  their  old  home.  One  of 
the  daughters,  Orpah  by  name,  accordingly  went  back. 
But  the  other,  whose  name  was  Ruth,  would  not  do  so. 

7 


98  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

Upon  this,  Naomi  turned  to  Euth  and  said:  "Behold, 
thy  sister-in-law  is  gone  back  unto  her  people,  and  unto 
her  god:  return  thou  after  thy  sister-in-law."  To  this, 
Ruth  replied,  "Intreat  me  not  to  leave  thee,  and  to  return 
from  following  after  thee ;  for  wherever  thou  goest,  I  will 
go;  and  where  thou  lodgest,  I  will  lodge;  thy  people 
shall  be  my  people,  and  thy  god  my  god.''  In  this  ease, 
the  Israelite  woman  urges  the  Moabite  woman  to  return 
to  Moab  and  to  Chemosh,  the  god  of  Moab.  But  with 
the  Moabite  woman,  personal  ties  overbalance  national 
ties.  If  she  may  accompany  her  beloved  mother-in-law, 
she  is  willing  to  leave  Moab  and  the  god  of  Moab,  and 
go  to  any  people  and  any  god  that  Naomi  chooses.  Any  of 
the  gods  will  do  for  Ruth.  In  her  own  country  she  has 
been  worshipping  Chemosh.  Her  sister  has  gone  back  to 
Chemosh;  and  Naomi  advises  Ruth  to  do  the  same.  But 
if  her  mother-in-law  is  going  to  return  to  Israel  and  Yah- 
weh,  then  Ruth  also  will  go  to  Israel  and  Yahweh. 

The  successful  struggle  of  the  Israelites  to  obtain 
possession  of  the  land  of  Canaan  implied,  of  course,  not 
only  that  Israel  acquired  the  land,  but  also  that  Yahweh 
had  acquired  it.  Canaan  became  not  only  the  land  of  Is- 
rael, but  also  the  land  of  Yahweh.  He  became  the  "god 
of  the  land,"  as  the  ancient  saying  goes.  In  those  times, 
removal  from  a  country,  as  in  the  case  of  Ruth  and  Na- 
omi, was  usually  the  same  as  leaving  the  Avorship  of  that 
country's  god.  Ruth  and  Orpah  and  Naomi  thought  it 
natural  and  right  to  serve  the  deity  of  any  people  among 
whom  they  lived.  Words  illustrating  this  idea  are  put 
in  the  mouth  of  the  famous  David  in  1  Samuel  26  :19,  20 : 
"They  have  driven  me  out  this  day  that  I  should  not 
cleave  unto  the  inheritance  of  Yahweh,  saying,  Go  serve 
other  gods.  Now,  therefore,  let  not  my  blood  fall  to  the 
earth  away  from  the  presence  of  Yahweh."  But  if  certain 
formalities  were  observed,  it  was  thought  possible  to  wor- 
ship the  god  of  a  land  outside  of  his  own  "inheritance." 
Naaman,  captain  of  the  army  of  the  king  of  Syria,  is  rep- 
resented as  asking  that  some  of  the  soil  of  the  land  of 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  99 

Israel  be  given  him,  so  that  he  could  carry  it  away  into 
Syria,  and  worship  Yahweh  upon  it  (2  Kings  5:17).  "I 
pray  thee,"  he  says,  "let  there  be  given  to  thy  servant  two 
mules'  burden  of  earth;  for  thy  servant  will  henceforth 
offer  neither  burnt  offering  nor  sacrifice  unto  other  gods, 
but  unto  Yahweh.''  The  same  primitive  ideas  are  illus- 
trated by  a  passage  in  2  Kings  17,  which  is  partly  repro- 
duced here,  and  which  needs  no  further  comment. 

"And  the  king  of  Assyria  brought  men  from  Babylon, 
and  from  Cuthah,  and  from  Avva,  and  from  Sepharvaim 
instead  of  the  children  of  Israel;  and  they  possessed 
Samaria,  and  dwelt  in  the  cities  thereof.  And  so  it  was 
at  the  beginning  of  their  dwelling  there,  that  they  feared 
not  Yahweh.  .  .  .  Then  the  king  of  Assyria  com- 
manded, saying.  Carry  thither  one  of  the  priests  whom 
ye  brought  from  thence ;  and  let  them  go  and  dwell  there, 
and  let  him  teach  them  the  manner  of  the  god  of  the  land. 
So  one  of  the  priests  whom  they  had  carried  away  from 
Samaria  came  and  dwelt  in  Bethel,  and  taught  them  how 
they  should  fear  Y^ahweh.  Howbeit  every  nation  made 
gods  of  their  own,  and  put  them  in  the  houses  of  the  high 
places  which  the  Samaritans  had  made,  every  nation  in 
their  cities  wherein  they  dwelt.  ...  So  they  feared 
Yahweh  and  made  unto  them  from  among  themselves 
priests  of  the  high  places,  which  sacrificed  for  them  in  the 
houses  of  the  high  places.  They  feared  Yahweh,  and  served 
their  own  gods,  after  the  manner  of  the  nations  from 
among  whom  they  had  been  carried  away." 

Another  instructive  example  of  ancient  ideas  about 
national  gods  is  afforded  by  the  inscription  on  the  famous 
Moabite  Stone.  The  stone  was  discovered  in  1868,  in  what 
was  once  the  land  of  Moab,  by  the  Keverend  Klein,  an 
agent  of  the  Church  Missionary  Society.  This  ancient 
writing  is  inscribed  in  a  language  almost  identical  with 
that  of  the  early  Israelites.  The  Moabite  and  Hebrew 
letters  are  the  same.  The  style  of  the  inscription  re- 
sembles that  of  the  earlier  parts  of  the  Old  Testament. 
And  last  but  not  least,  the  Moabite  theology  corresponds 


100  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

with  the  primitive  theology  of  Israel.     The  translation  of 
a  part  of  the  inscription  is  as  follows : 

"I  am  Mesha,  King  of  Moab.  .  .  .  And  I  made 
this  high  place  for  Chemosh.  .  .  .  Omri,  King  of  Is- 
rael, afflicted  Moab  for  many  days,  because  Chemosh  was 
angry  with  his  land.  And  his  son  succeeded  him ;  and  he 
also  said,  I  will  afflict  Moab.  .  .  .  But  ...  Is- 
rael perished  with  an  everlasting  destruction.  .  .  . 
And  Chemosh  said  unto  me.  Go,  take  Nebo  against  Is- 
rael. And  I  went  by  night,  and  fought  against  it  from  the 
break  of  dawn  until  noon.  And  I  took  it,  and  slew  the 
whole  of  it,  7,000  men  and  male  strangers.  .  .  .  And 
the  king  of  Israel  had  built  Yahas,  and  abode  in  it,  whiJe 
he  fought  against  me.  But  Chemosh  drave  him  out  from 
before  me.  .  .  .  And  Chemosh  said  unto  me,  Go 
down,  fight  against  Horonen.  .  .  .  And  I  went 
down''   (40). 

The  god  Yahweh  of  the  Old  Testament,  then,  was  not 
at  first  regarded  as  the  supreme  God  of  the  universe. 
Originally  he  was,  at  most,  the  national  god  of  Israel, 
just  as  Chemosh  was  the  national  god  of  Moab,  or  as 
Dagon  Avas  a  local  god  of  the  Philistines,  or  as  Kimmon  was 
the  god  of  the  Syrians.  In  the  words  of  Professor  Well- 
hausen,  "Moab,  Ammon,  and  Edom,  Israel's  nearest  kins- 
folk and  neighbors,  were  monotheists  in  precisely  the 
same  sense  in  which  Israel  itself  was"   (41). 

§  56.  —  We  are  careful  to  say  that  Yahweh  was  ori- 
ginally at  most  the  god  of  Israel,  because  there  is  a  large 
probability  that  Israel  acquired  him  from  a  smaller  peo- 
ple shortly  before  the  conquest  of  Canaan.  Most  ancient 
gods  grow  up  with  the  people  that  serve  them;  but  the 
Israelites  cherished  a  tradition  that  Yahweh  had  "chosen," 
or  "elected,"  them,  and  made  a  covenant  with  them,  before 
the  conquest  of  Canaan;  and  this  tradition,  moreover, 
seems  to  have  a  solid  historical  basis. 

Prior  to  the  settlement  in  Canaan,  the  Israelites,  as 
we  have  seen,  were  wandering  shepherd  tribes,  living  the 
life  of  the  desert.     According  to  tradition,  a  number  of 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  101 

Israelitish  tribes,  while  searching  for  subsistence  in  a 
time  of  famine,  were  attracted  by  the  pastures  of  Goshen, 
on  the  northeastern  frontier  of  Egypt.  "The  land  of 
Goshen,"  says  Professor  W.K.  Smith,  "did  not  belong  to 
the  [Egyptian]  Delta  proper,  which  can  never  have  been 
given  up  to  a  shepherd  tribe,  and  would  not  have  suited 
their  way  of  life.  In  all  ages  nomadic  or  half  nomadic 
tribes,  quite  distinct  from  the  Egyptians  proper,  have  pas- 
tured their  flocks  on  the  verge  of  the  rich  lands  of  the 
Delta.  .  .  .  That  the  Israelites  at  this  time  came  un- 
der any  considerable  influence  of  Egyptian  civilization 
must  appear  highly  improbable  to  any  one  who  knows  the 
life  of  the  nomads  of  Egypt  even  in  the  present  day,  when 
there  is  a  large  Arab  element  in  the  settled  population" 
(42).  Here,  then,  according  to  tradition,  the  original  Is- 
raelite tribes  pitched  their  tents  for  a  season.  At  first 
they  seem  to  have  been  tolerated  by  the  Egyptian  govern- 
ment. Later,  however,  entanglements  of  Egypt  with  for- 
eign powers  may  have  moved  the  Pharaoh  to  place  a  guard 
over  these  free  sons  of  the  desert,  by  way  of  precaution, 
and  to  exact  forced  labor  from  them. 

The  real  historical  details  of  the  situation  are  hid- 
den in  a  haze  of  myth ;  and  in  view  of  the  positions  pres- 
ently to  be  worked  out  in  connection  with  a  study  of  Is- 
raelite sociology  in  Canaan,  these  details,  even  if  we  could 
recover  them,  are  of  little  or  no  importance.  At  most, 
they  could  only  serve  to  satisfy  a  reasonable  scientific 
curiosity.  The  outstanding  facts,  however,  appear  to 
be  plain  and  simple:  Temporary  settlement  on  the  bor- 
ders of  Egypt;  trouble  with  the  Egyptian  government; 
escape  under  the  leadership  of  a  man  named  Moses. 

In  greater  detail  the  situation  presents  itself  to  the 
writer  as  follows: 

Moses  was  an  Israelite  who  had  perhaps  made  him- 
self obnoxious  to  the  Egyptian  government  by  actively 
espousing  the  cause  of  his  brethren.  He  had  been  forced 
out  of  the  country;  and  had  then  attached  himself  to 
a  Midianitish  tribe  known  as  the  "Kenites,"  and  married 


102  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

one  of  the  daughters  of  Jethro,  the  priest  and  chief  of 
the  Kenites. 

The  wandering  ground  of  this  tribe  was  in  the 
Mount  Sinai  region,  adjacent  to  the  land  of  Goshen 
where  the  Israelites  were  temporarily  located.  But  in 
Judges  1:  16  we  find  that,  in  company  with  the  Israel- 
ites, these  Kenites  took  part  in  the  attack  upon  the  land 
of  Canaan.  "And  the  children  of  the  Kenite,  Moses' 
father-in-law,"  so  runs  the  record,  "went  up  with  the 
children  of  Judah  into  the  wilderness  of  Judah."  In 
Judges  4  and  5  we  learn  how  Jael,  the  wife  of  Heber 
the  Kenite,  helped  on  the  cause  of  Israel  and  Yahweh 
by  killing  Sisera,  one  of  the  enemies  of  Israel.  There 
were  Kenites  in  the  south  of  Judah  in  the  time  of  king 
Saul  ( 1  Samuel  15 :  6) ;  and  David  appears  in  connection 
with  a  reference  to  the  cities  of  these  Kenites  (1  Samuel 
30 :  30).  In  the  time  of  the  two  Israelite  kingdoms,  we 
read  in  2  Kings  10  of  the  "zeal"  of  Jonadab,  or  Jehona- 
dab,  the  Kenite  Rechabite  (Cf.  1  Chronicles  2:55). 
And  later  still,  in  the  time  of  Jeremiah,  we  see  the  Ken- 
ite descendants  of  this  man  Jehonadab  pouring  into  Je- 
rusalem from  the  country  for  fear  of  the  army  of  the  Chal- 
deans ( Jeremiah  35).  Thus  it  is  plain  that  the  Kenites  of 
Sinai  joined  forces  with  the  Israelites  when  the  latter 
attacked  the  land  of  Canaan;  and  that  they  were  at 
length  partially  absorbed  into  Israel. 

No  desert  tribe  undertakes  a  migration  of  this  kind 
for  trivial  reasons.  Probably  the  food  supply  of  the  Ken- 
ites was  falling  short.  Like  many  other  tribes  at  this 
time,  they  were  evidently  disturbed,  and  on  the  watch 
for  a  new  location. 

We  have,  therefore,  two  important  circumstances  to 
take  into  account:  The  Israelites  in  trouble  in  Goshen 
on  the  northeast  border  of  Egypt;  and  the  Kenites  in 
trouble  not  far  away  in  the  Sinai  region. 

Now,  the  position  toAvard  which  modern  criticism 
strongly  gravitates  is,  that  Yahweh  was  the  god  of  the 
Kenites  before  he  became  the  god  of  Israel;    and  that 


ORIENTAL    CIVILIZATION.  103 

Moses  was  the  medium  whereby  Israel  became  identified 
with  the  name  of  this  god.  It  is  around  these  critical 
propositions  that  we  are  here  attempting  a  version  of  some 
of  the  details  of  Israelite  religion  and  history  prior  to  the 
conquest  of  Canaan. 

Going  back,  then,  to  Moses,  w^e  find  that  after  leav- 
ing Egypt  he  married  into  the  tribe  of  the  Kenites.  This 
tribe,  we  may  suppose,  was  outgrowing  its  old  home  in 
the  Sinai  region;  and  the  problem  of  subsistence  was 
becoming  more  pressing.  But  the  Kenites  alone  were  not 
able  to  conquer  the  territories  they  needed.  At  the  same 
time,  the  Israelites,  across  the  way  on  the  borders  of 
Egypt,  were  being  ill-treated  by  the  government.  Their 
old  gods  had  evidently  forsaken  or  failed  them;  and 
they  had  lost  heart.  But  Moses  now  conceives  a  plan 
whose  execution  makes  him  famous  in  history.  Taking 
advantage  of  the  needs  of  both  Israelites  and  Kenites, 
he  will  combine  the  two  peoples  in  an  attack  on  the  land 
of  Canaan.  He  communicates  with  his  brethren  in 
Goshen,  and  tells  them  that  Yahweh,  the  thundering  god 
of  hosts,  mighty  in  battle,  together  with  his  people  the 
Kenites,  will  help  them  to  escape  their  troubles,  and  find 
a  more  pleasant  home  in  a  land  flowing  with  milk  and 
honey.  This  encourages  the  children  of  Israel;  and 
awaiting  a  favorable  opportunity,  they  escape  in  the  night. 

Conditions  in  Egypt  at  this  time  were  favorable  to 
such  a  move.  Egyptian  military  strength  was  not  what 
it  had  been  formerly.  There  were  hostile  pressure  upon 
the  country  from  Avithout,  and  grievous  pestilence  within, 
such  as  not  infrequently  sweeps  over  unsanitary  and  ig- 
norant populations.  At  the  time  of  the  escape  of  the  Is- 
raelites there  may  have  been  a  fight  with,  or  a  pursuit  by, 
an  Egyptian  guard;  but,  although  the  general  situation  is 
plain,  it  is  impossible  to  say  what  were  the  exact  histori- 
cal details,  for  the  narratives  upon  which  we  mainly  rely 
are  heavily  incrusted  with  miraculous  accounts.  At  any 
rate,  the  exodus  from  Egyptian  territory  was  regarded  as 


104  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

a  deliverance;   and  it  made  a  great  impression  that  was 
never  forgotten.* 

The  alliance,  or  covenant,  between  Yahweh,  the  Is- 
raelites, and  the  Kenites  was  formally  celebrated  at 
Sinai,  or  Horeb,  "the  mountain  of  Yahweh,"  in  a  typi- 
cally primitive  manner.  The  record  of  this  event  is  found 
in  the  document  whereof  Exodus  18 :  12  is  a  part.  Notice 
the  wording  closely.  "And  Jethro,  Moses'  father  in  law, 
brought  a  burnt  offering  and  sacrifices  for  God.  And 
Aaron  and  all  the  elders  of  Israel  came  to  eat  bread  with 
Moses'  father  in  law  before  God."  (It  may  be  explained 
incidentally  that  the  Hebrew  word  "elohim,"  plural  in 
form,  but  singular  in  ordinary  Biblical  usage,  and  here 
translated  "God,"  is  an  alternative  term  for  "Yahweh," 
as  in  verse  1  of  the  same  chapter).  Notice  that  the  burnt 
offering  and  sacrifices  were  brought,  not  by  Moses,  nor 
Aaron,  nor  by  any  of  the  Israelites,  but  by  Jethro,  the 
leader  and  priest  of  the  Kenites.  "And  Aaron  and  all  the 
elders  of  Israel,"  says  the  account  already  quoted,  "came 
to  eat  bread  with  Moses'  father  in  law"  before  Yahweh. 
Notice  also  that  Aaron  and  the  elders  of  Israel,  to  the 
exclusion  of  Moses,  the  most  important  personage  con- 
cerned in  the  movement,  are  mentioned  as  partaking  of 

*  Readers  who  have  been  trained  in  the  objective,  literalistic  theol- 
ogy may  think  it  strange  that  we  do  not  assert  the  fact  of  a  super- 
natural divine  interference  in  harmony  with  Biblical  claims.  But  it  is 
not  properly  an  object  of  an  examination  of  this  kind  to  inquire  whether 
there  was  either  an  extrinsic  or  an  intrinsic  divine  guidance  of  events. 
As  a  matter  of  personal  opinion,  we  do  not  think  that  the  history  in 
question  will  bear  the  specific  interpretation  put  upon  it  by  the  Biblical 
writers.  That  is  to  say,  we  do  not  believe  that  anything  occurred  in 
this  stage  of  Israel's  history  (nor  any  other  stage,  for  that  matter) 
which  was  out  of  the  usual  order  of  nature  and  human  nature  as  we. 
experience  them  now.  But  while  we  think  it  proper  to  express  the 
belief  that  the  history  of  Israel  will  not  bear  the  specific  interpretation 
put  upon  it  by  the  Biblical  writers,  we  do  not  feel  called  upon  in  this 
connection  to  state  our  views  on  the  question  whether  or  not  the  gen- 
eral interpretation  put  upon  Israelitish  history  by  the  Biblical  writers 
is  true.  This  last  is,  after  all,  the  critical  religious  question;  and  any 
discussion  of  it  here  would  be  out  of  place. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  105 

the  sacrificial  meal  with  Jethro  the  priest.  Why  was  not 
Moses  included  in  this?  The  answer  is,  that  Moses  is 
not  specially  mentioned  in  connection  with  this  ceremony 
because,  according  to  primitive  custom,  he  had  already 
allied  himself  with  Yahweh  and  the  Kenites  by  marriage 
and  adoption  into  the  tribe.  Any  further  ceremony  on 
Moses'  account  would  have  been  superfluous.  Therefore 
it  is  that  Aaron  and  the  elders  of  Israel,  to  the  exclusion 
of  Moses,  are  mentioned  as  eating  the  sacrifice  with  Jethro 
the  priest. 

Under  ordinary  conditions  the  adoption  by  strangers 
of  the  god  of  a  tribe  means  that  the  political  and  social 
identity  of  the  strangers  is  merged  in  that  of  the  earlier 
worshippers  of  the  god.  So  that  it  would  seem,  on  first 
sight,  as  if  the  Israelites  ought  to  have  become  Kenites 
by  this  transaction  instead  of  retaining,  as  they  did,  their 
own  political  identity  and  even  largely  absorbing  the 
Kenites.  But  under  ordinary  conditions  the  incoming 
strangers  bear  a  smaller  ratio  to  the  original  worshippers 
than  the  Israelites  did  to  the  Kenites;  they  are  either 
married  into  the  tribe,  or  adopted,  or  conquered  by  it; 
and  they  affiliate  with  the  worshippers  first,  then  with  the 
god  through  the  worshippers.  In  this  case  the  circum- 
stances were  all  reversed.  The  Israelites  outnumbered  the 
Kenites,  or  at  least  those  of  the  Kenites  who  accompanied 
them  into  Canaan;  they  were  neither  conquered  nor 
adopted  by  the  Kenites,  nor  received  through  the  door  of 
marriage;  and  they  regarded  themselves  as  having  affili- 
ated with  the  god  when  leaving  Egyptian  territory,  before 
associating  with  his  earlier  worshippers. 

And  thus  we  see  the  historical  basis  for  the  tradition 
that  Yahweh  chose  the  Israelites,  and  delivered  them  out 
of  Egypt   (43). 

We  have  adverted  to  the  probable  Kenite  derivation 
of  Yahweh  by  way  of  preliminary  to  the  secular  history  of 
Israel.  We  do  not  assert  dogmatically  that  Yahweh  was 
derived  from  the  Kenites;  but  we  accept  this  view  pro- 
visionally. 


106  ^A^   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

It  is  certain  that  the  Old  Testament  literature  shows 
persistent  and  unmistakable  traces  of  the  association  of 
Yahweh  with  the  region  of  Mount  Sinai,  the  home  of  the 
Kenites.  In  Deuteronomy  33 :  2  we  read :  "Yahweh  came 
from  Sinai,  and  rose  from  Seir  unto  them;  he  shined 
forth  from  Mount  Paran."  The  terms  "Paran^'  and  "Seir" 
are  connected  with  the  Sinai  region.  In  Judges  5 : 4  we 
read:  "Yahweh,  thou  wentest  forth  out  of  Seir."  In 
Habakkuk  3:3  we  read :  "The  Holy  One  came  from 
Mount  Paran."  The  tradition  in  1  Kings  19  sends  the 
prophet  Elijah,  in  a  season  of  discouragement,  to  Horeb, 
as  Mount  Sinai  is  otherwise  called,  Finally,  in  Hosea  12 : 
9  and  elsewhere,  the  national  deity  is  made  to  declare,  "I 
am  Yahweh  thy  god  from  the  land  of  Egypt."  The  per- 
sistence of  the  association  of  Yahweh  with  Sinai  is  ex- 
plained, we  think,  partly  by  the  fact  that,  as  god  of  the 
Kenites,  he  was  once  actually  thought  to  live  in  the  Sinai 
region,  and  partly  by  the  fact  that  the  Israelite  conquest 
of  Canaan  was  not  a  sudden  event,  but  a  long  process 
wherein,  so  to  speak,  Yahweh  was  drawn  slowly  (in  the 
thought  of  his  worshippers)  from  his  old  home  on  Sinai 
to  his  new  home  in  the  land  of  Canaan. 

§  57.  —  But  the  worship  of  Yahweh  did  not  of  itself 
comprehend  the  early  religion  of  Israel.  Along  w^ith  the 
general  worship  of  the  national  god  there  went  the  special 
and  more  primitive  worship  of  family  gods.  These  little 
gods  were  represented  by  images  called  "teraphim;"  and 
their  worship  corresponded  to  the  ancestor  worship  of 
the  Chinese  and  the  Eomans.  We  find  an  instance  of  this 
private,  local  religion  in  the  case  of  Micali  the  Ephraim- 
ite,  as  set  forth  in  Judges  17.  Micah's  mother  dedicated 
eleven  hundred  pieces  of  silver  to  religious  objects.  She 
"took  two  hundred  pieces  of  silver,  and  gave  them  to 
the  founder,  w^ho  made  thereof  a  graven  image  and  a  mol- 
ten image:  and  it  was  in  the  house  of  Micah.  And  the 
man  Micah  had  an  house  of  gods,  and  he  made  an  ephod 
and  teraphim,  and  consecrated  one  of  his  sons,  who  be- 
came his  priest."  Later,  the  son  was  displaced  by  a  Levite, 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  107' 

who  was  hired  by  Micah  for  his  food,  clothing,  and  ten 
pieces  of  silver  per  year.  This  religious  establishment  ac- 
quired no  small  reputation.  Among  its  patrons  were  the 
Danites,  who  were  so  pleased  with  the  counsel  they  had 
received  from  its  oracle  that  they  stole  the  priest,  the  tera- 
phim,  and  the  entire  outfit.  Another  instance,  from  a 
later  period  of  Israelite  history,  is  equally  interesting: 
When  king  Saul  tried  to  slay  David,  Michal,  the  wife  of 
David,  let  him  down  through  the  window.  "And  Michal 
took  the  teraphim,  and  laid  it  in  the  bed,  and  put  a  pillow 
of  goats'  hair  at  the  head  thereof,  and  covered  it  with  the 
clothes.  And  when  Saul  sent  messengers  to  take  David 
she  said.  He  is  sick.  And  Saul  sent  messengers  to  see 
David,  saying,  bring  him  up  to  me  in  the  bed  that  I  may 
slay  him.  And  when  the  messengers  came  in,  behold  the 
teraphim  was  in  the  bed  with  the  pillow  of  goats'  hair  at 
the  head  thereof  (I  Samuel  19).  In  further  illustration 
of  this  point,  we  find  in  the  legends  of  Genesis,  chapter  31, 
that  when  Rachel  eloped  with  Jacob,  she  stole  the  tera- 
phim of  Laban,  her  father.  This  account  does  not  have  to 
be  historical  to  serve  our  present  purpose.  At  the  least,  it 
reflects  the  religious  ideas  of  the  people  among  whom  it 
originated  and  gained  currency.  Continuing  we  read  that 
the  angry  father,  Laban,  said  to  Jacob,  "Wherefore  hast 
thou  stolen  my  gods?  And  Jacob  answered  and  said  to 
Laban  .  .  .  With  whomsoever  thou  findest  thy  gods, 
he  shall  not  live  .  .  .  For  Jacob  knew  not  that 
Rachel  had  stolen  them.  And  Laban  went  into  Jacob's 
tent,  and  into  Leah's  tent,  and  into  the  tent  of  the  two 
maidservants;  but  he  found  them  not.  And  he  went  out 
of  Leah's  tent,  and  entered  Rachel's  tent.  Now  Rachel 
had  taken  the  teraphim,  and  put  them  in  the  camel» 
furniture,  and  sat  upon  them." 

§  58.  —  A  darker  feature  of  these  barbaric  times  was 
human  sacrifice,  which  was  practiced  among  the  Israelites 
as  among  other  primitive  peoples.  In  2  Samuel  21  w^e  find 
an  illustration  of  this  as  follows : 


108  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

"And  there  was  a  famine  in  the  days  of  David  three 
yearSj  year  after  year ;  and  David  sought  the  face  of  Yah- 
weh.  And  Yahweh  said,  It  is  for  Saul,  and  for  his  bloody 
house,  because  he  put  to  death  the  Gibeonites.  And  the 
king  called  the  Gibeonites,  and  said  unto  them.  What 
shall  I  do  for  you?  and  wherewith  shall  I  make  atone- 
ment that  ye  may  bless  the  inheritance  of  Yahweh?  And 
the  Gibeonites  said  unto  him.  It  is  no  matter  of  silver  or 
gold  between  us  and  Saul,  or  his  house;  neither  is  it  for 
us  to  put  any  man  to  death  in  Israel.  And  he  said,  What 
ye  shall  say,  that  will  I  do  for  you.  And  they  said  unto 
the  king.  The  man  that  consumed  us,  and  that  devised 
against  us,  that  we  should  be  destroyed  from  remaining 
in  any  of  the  borders  of  Israel,  let  seven  men  of  his  sons 
be  delivered  unto  us,  and  we  will  hang  them  up  unto  Yah- 
weh. And  the  king  said,  I  will  give  them  .  .  .  And 
he  delivered  them  into  the  hands  of  the  Gibeonites,  and 
they  hanged  them  in  the  mountain  before  Yahweh,  and 
they  fell  all  seven  together :  and  they  were  put  to  death." 

Another  instance  is  found  in  1  Samuel  15 :  33,  where 
we  read  that  Samuel  hewed  Agag  in  pieces  before  Yahweh 
in  Gil  gal.  A  better  known  case  is  that  recorded  in 
Judges  11  —  the  sacrifice  of  Jephtha^s  daughter   (44). 

§  59.  —  Another  important  feature  of  the  thought  of 
the  Israelites  is  found  in  their  ideas  of  death  and  the 
other  world.  They  had  no  doctrine  of  immortality,  pro- 
perly so  called.  In  Psalm  6,  for  instance,  the  writer  says, 
"Eeturn  Yahweh;  deliver  my  soul:  save  me  for  thy  lov- 
ing-kindness' sake.  For  in  death  there  is  no  remembrance 
of  thee:  In  Sheol  who  shall  give  thee  thanks?''  And 
again,  in  Psalm  39,  we  read,  "O  spare  me,  that  I  may  re- 
cover strength,  before  I  go  hence,  and  be  no  more."  A 
psalm  preserved  in  Isaiah  38  says,  "For  sheol  cannot 
praise  thee,  death  cannot  celebrate  thee :  they  that  go 
down  mlo  the  pit  cannot  hope  for  thy  truth.  The  living, 
the  living,  he  shall  praise  thee,  as  I  do  this  day."  In 
Ecclesiastes  9:5  we  read :    "The  shades  [wrongly  trans- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  109" 

lated  ^dead']  know  not  anything;  neither  have  they  any 
more  a  reward ;  for  the  memory  of  them  is  forgotten." 

But  while  it  is  plain  that  no  doctrine  of  immortality 
in  the  modern  sense  was  cherished  in  Israel,  it  is  equally 
clear  that  the  Israelites,  in  common  with  other  primitive 
people,  had  some  positive,  as  well  as  negative,  ideas  about 
the  ghost  world.  The  references  to  the  underworld, 
quoted  above,  do  not  imply  the  idea  that  the  "refaim,"  or 
shades,  were  thought  to  be  absolutely  dead,  like  stocks 
and  stones.  They  were  thought  to  lead  a  shadowy,  color- 
less existence,  deprived  of  all  that  makes  life  worth  liv- 
ing. It  was  believed  that  they  could  be  called  back  for  a 
few  minutes  by  spiritual  mediums,  or  necromancers.  The 
story  of  king  Saul  consulting  the  witch  of  Endor,  found  in 
1  Samuel  28,  illustrates  this: 

"Said  Saul  unto  his  servants.  Seek  me  a  woman  that 
hath  a  familiar  spirit,  that  I  may  go  to  her,  and  inquire 
of  her.  And  his  servants  said  to  him.  Behold,  there  is  a 
woman  that  hath  a  familiar  spirit  at  Endor.  And  Saul 
disguised  himself,  and  put  on  other  raiment,  and  went,  he 
and  two  men  with  him,  and  they  came  to  the  woman  by 
night:  and  he  said.  Divine  unto  me,  I  pray  thee,  by  the 
familiar  spirit,  and  bring  me  up  whomsoever  I  shall  name 
unto  thee  .  .  .  Then  said  the  woman.  Whom  shall 
I  bring  up  unto  thee?  And  he  said.  Bring  me  up  Samuel. 
And  when  the  woman  saw  Samuel,  she  cried  with  a  loud 
voice.  .  .  And  the  woman  said  unto  Saul,  I  see  a  god 
coming  up  out  of  the  earth.*  And  he  said  unto  her.  What 

*  This  is  probably  reminiscent  of  the  fact  that  the  gods  were 
developed  originally  from  the  heroic  dead.  The  same  term  is  applied  to 
the  mighty  dead,  to  the  divinities  worshiped  by  the  living,  and  also  to 
living  great  men  like  judges,  as  in  Exodus  21:  6  and  22:  8.  In  these 
Exodus  passages  the  seventeenth  century  English  version  translates  the 
Hebrew  word  "elohim"  by  the  term  "judges,"  without  explanation.  The 
Revised  Version,  however,  in  both  cases,  translates  the  term  with  the 
word  "God,"  and  places  the  word  "judges"  in  the  margin.  Compare 
Psalm  82:1,  where  the  old  version  translates  the  word   "elohim"   with. 


110  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

form  is  he  of?  And  she  said,  An  old  man  cometh  up; 
and  he  is  covered  with  a  robe.  And  Saul  perceived  that 
it  was  Samuel,  and  he  bowed  with  his  face  to  the  ground, 
and  did  obeisance.  And  Samuel  said  to  Saul,  Why  hast 
thou  disquieted  me  to  bring  me  up?" 

Of  course,  w^e  do  not  necessarily  have  to  take  this  ac- 
count as  wholly,  or  even  partly,  historical  in  order  to  use 
it  for  the  illustration  of  our  point.  Many  of  these  Bible 
stories  are  no  truer  in  the  literal  sense  than  corresponding 
tales  among  the  Greeks,  Romans,  and  Indians.  The  story 
may  have  grown  out  of  an  actual  interview  between  king 
Saul  and  a  witch,  or  it  may  have  been  a  myth  originating 
after  the  death  of  Saul.  In  either  case  it  illustrates  the 
primitive  idea  that  the  shades  are  not  wholly  devoid  of 
life.  To  the  same  effect  is  the  reference  in  2  Kings  21 :  6 
which  states  that  king  Manasseh  used  enchantments,  and 
dealt  with  them  that  had  familiar  spirits,  and  with  wiz- 
ards. The  many  well  known  passages  regarding  spiritual 
mediums,  all  through  the  Old  Testament,  prove  that  the 
shades  were  thought  to  retain  some  power  of  life.  A 
wholesale  revival  of  the  shades  is  depicted  in  Isaiah 
14 :  9-12,  where  we  read :  "Sheol  from  beneath  is  moved 
for  thee  to  meet  thee  at  thy  coming:  it  stirreth  up  the 
refaim  [shades]  .  .  .  All  they  shall  answer  and  say 
unto  thee.  Art  thou  also  become  weak  as  we?  art  thou  be- 
come like  unto  us?'' 

It  becomes  evident  by  this  hasty  and  inadequate 
sketch  that  the  primitive  religious  ideas  of  the  Is- 
raelites were  on  a  level  with  ideas  prevailing  everywhere 
throughout  the  primitive  world  at  a  corresponding  stage 
of  culture  (45).  To  some  readers,  the  above  observations 
and  citations  w^ill  be  novel.  To  the  scholar,  if  he  care  to 
read  them,  they  will  serve  only  as  a  hasty  review.  In  any 
case  they  are  a  necessary  introduction  to  the  sociological 
and  historical  treatment  now  to  follow. 

the  phrase  "the  mighty,"  and  the  new  version  translates  with  "God." 
Also  Genesis  6:  2,  4,  where  "the  sons  of  elohim,"  translated  "the  sons 
of  God,"  are  spoken  of  as  coming  in  unto  "the  daughters  of  men." 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  Ill 

§  60.  —  The  political  condition  of  the  land  of  Canaan 
at  the  time  of  the  attack  by  Israel  was  confused,  and  could 
not  well  have  been  otherwise.  In  the  centuries  immedi- 
ately preceding  the  Israelite  Conquest,  the  land  had  been 
ruled  and  fought  over  by  at  least  three  great  oriental 
powers.  The  Canaanites,  as  we  have  seen,  had  acknow- 
ledged the  overlordship  of  the  old  Babylonians  for  so  long 
that  the  language  of  the  dominant  race  had  been  adopted 
as  a  common  medium  of  written  communication  among 
the  upper  classes.  In  the  fifteenth  century  b.  c,  however. 
Babylonia  was  disturbed  by  an  irresistible  combination  of 
circumstances.  She  was  troubled  at  home  by  the  rising 
military  power  of  Assyria  in  the  north ;  while  in  Canaan 
she  was  replaced  by  the  northeastward  advance  of  Egypt. 
Governors  from  Egypt  were  placed  in  such  Canaanite 
cities  as  Jerusalem,  Tyre,  Askelon,  Gezer,  and  Hazor.  But 
the  rule  of  the  Egyptians  did  not  long  extend  over  this  re- 
gion. In  fact,  before  a  century  has  passed,  we  find  the  gov- 
ernors of  these  cities  writing  home  for  help,  declaring 
their  inability  to  hold  the  country.  Presently  the  land 
was  relinquished,  partly  to  local  Canaanitish  tribes,  and 
partly  to  the  Hittite  kingdom  whose  seat  was  in  Asia 
Minor.  It  was  between  these  moves  on  the  great  checker- 
board of  oriental  politics  that  the  barbarian  Israelites, 
with  their  primitive  Yahwism,  broke  from  the  wilderness 
into  the  land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey   (46). 

§  61.  —  The  Conquest  was  not  a  well  organized  cam- 
paign with  a  speedy  issue.  Beginning  about  1,300  B.  C, 
it  was  carried  forward  by  the  different  Israelitish  tribes 
in  an  irregular  way  over  a  long  period  of  years.  The 
Canaanites  were  neither  driven  out  nor  annihilated,  as 
uncritical  Bible  readers  are  prone  to  imagine;  although 
many  were  of  course  killed  in  battle.  A  suggestive  ac- 
count is  given  in  the  first  chapter  of  Judges.  Commenc- 
ing at  verse  27,  we  read : 

"And  [the  tribe  of]  Manasseh  did  not  drive  out  the 
inhabitants  of  Beth-shean  and  her  towns,  nor  of  Taanach 
and  her  towns,  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Dor  and  her  towns, 


112  AN  EXAMINATION  OF  SOCIETY. 

nor  tlie  inhabitants  of  Ibleam  and  her  towns,  nor 
the  inhabitants  of  Megiddo  and  her  towns:  but  the 
Canaanites  would  dwell  in  that  land.  And  it  came  to 
pass,  when  Israel  was  waxen  strong,  that  they  put  the 
Canaanites  to  taskwork,  and  did  not  utterly  drive  them 
out.  And  [the  tribe  of]  Ephraim  drave  not  out  the  Cana- 
anites that  dwelt  in  Gezer;  but  the  Canaanites  dwelt  in 
Gezer  among  them.  [The  tribe  of]  Zebulun  drave  not  out 
the  inhabitants  of  Kitron,  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Nahalol ; 
but  the  Canaanites  dwelt  among  them,  and  became  tribu- 
tary. [The  tribe  of]  Asher  drave  not  out  the  inhabitants 
of  Acco,  nor  the  inhabitants  of  Zidon,  nor  of  Ahlab,  nor 
of  Achzib,  nor  of  Helbah,  nor  of  Aphik,  nor  of  Rehob :  but 
the  Asherites  dwelt  among  the  Canaanites,  the  inhabi- 
tants of  the  land :  for  they  did  not  drive  them  out.  [The 
tribe  of]  Naphtali  drave  not  out  the  inhabitants  of  Beth- 
anath ;  but  he  dwelt  among  the  Canaanites,  the  inhabitants 
of  the  land :  and  the  inhabitants  of  Beth-shemesh  and  of 
Beth-anath  became  tributary  unto  them.  And  the  Amor- 
ites  forced  the  children  of  Dan  into  the  hill  country ;  yet 
the  hand  of  the  house  of  Joseph  prevailed,  so  that  they 
became  tributary." 

The  Conquest,  as  we  have  said,  was  not  an  affair  of 
a  day  nor  a  year.  It  was  a  long  and  tedious  process.  The 
adjustment  of  the  newer  and  older  inhabitants  was  not 
complete  until  the  age  of  the  Judges  had  passed  away.  We 
learn  from  2  Samuel  5 :  6-10  that  the  Canaanitish  Jebu- 
sites  were  still  in  possession  of  Jerusalem  in  the  early  days 
of  king  David,  at  least  150  years  after  the  beginning  of  the 
Conquest.  "And  the  king  and  his  men  went  to  Jerusa- 
lem against  the  Jebusites,  the  inhabitants  of  the  land: 
which  spake  unto  David  saying.  Thou  shalt  not  come  in 
hither  but  the  blind  and  the  lame  shall  turn  thee  away. 
Nevertheless,  David  took  the  stronghold  of  Zion;  the 
same  is  the  city  of  David." 

§  G2.  —  In  connection  with  these  passages  it  becomes 
plain  that  the  history  of  Israel  in  Canaan  illustrates,  at 
the  very  outset,  the  great  and  overshadowing  fact  of  cleav- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  113 

age  into  upper  and  lower  classes.  Cleavage,  however,  was 
not  originated  by  the  Conquest.  It  existed  among  the 
barbarian  tribes  of  Israel  in  the  desert,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  nomadic  Abraham  with  his  many  slaves,  and  as  it 
does  among  nomadic  tribes  now  in  that  region.  But  the 
passage  of  Israel  from  nomadism  to  settled  life  in  Canaan 
brought  them  into  a  more  extensive  relation  with  the  in- 
stitution of  cleavage  than  ever  before.  Nor  was  cleavage 
unknown  to  the  Canaanites  before  the  conquest  by  Israel, 
for  the  "inhabitants  of  the  land,''  like  all  oriental 
peoples  then  and  now,  were  not  a  free,  democratic  race. 
They  were  stratified  into  upper  and  lower  classes  before 
the  Israelites  appeared. 

A  brilliant  sidelight  on  class  relations  in  Israel  is 
afforded  by  a  late  passage  in  Leviticus  25 :  39-47,  as  fol- 
lows : 

"If  thy  brother  be  waxen  poor  with  thee,  and  sell  him- 
self unto  thee,  thou  shalt  not  make  him  to  serve  as  a  bond- 
servant. As  an  hired  servant,  and  as  a  sojourner,  he  shall 
be  with  thee  unto  the  year  of  jubilee.  Then  shall  he 
go  out  from  thee.  And  as  for  thy  bondmen,  and  thy  bond- 
maids, which  thou  shalt  have  of  the  nations  that  are  round 
about  you,  of  them  shall  ye  buy  bondmen,  and  bondmaids. 
Moreover  of  the  children  of  the  strangers  that  do  sojourn 
among  you,  of  them  shall  ye  buy,  and  of  their  families  that 
are  with  you ;  and  they  shall  be  your  possession.  And  ye 
shall  make  them  an  inheritance  for  your  children  after 
you,  to  hold  them  for  a  possession.  Of  them  shall  ye  take 
your  bondmen  forever." 

An  interesting  bit  of  evidence  in  this  connection  is 
furnished  by  the  so-called  "tenth  commandment,''  re- 
corded in  Exodus  20 :  17.  It  is  an  injunction  against  covet- 
ousness ;  and  in  its  innocent  modern  translation  it  reads : 
"Thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbor's  wife,  nor  his  man- 
servant, nor  his  maidservant,  nor  his  ox,  nor  his  ass,  nor 
anything  that  is  thy  neighbor's."  The  words  rendered 
"manservant"  and  "maidservant"  would  better  have  been 

8 


114  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

"man  slave"  and  "woman  slave"  respectively.  The  slight- 
est thought  on  the  real  nature  of  this  well  known  injunc- 
tion is  enough  to  show  that  it  would  be  without  signifi- 
cance in  relation  to  these  terms  if  the  so-called  "servants" 
were  not  held  as  property.  There  is  nothing  wrong  in 
desiring  your  neighbor's  free,  hired  servant.  Manifestly, 
then,  this  famous  injunction  presupposes  a  condition  of 
slavery.  It  puts  human  beings  into  the  same  category  as 
cattle  and  houses ;  and  in  this  respect  it  is  an  aristocratic 
commandment. 

In  Genesis  9  we  find  an  early  legend  which  explains 
and  justifies  the  subjugation  of  the  people  of  Canaan  by 
the  Israelites.  Canaan  is  depicted  as  outraging  decency, 
whereupon  he  is  condemned  by  his  father,  Noah,  in  the 
following  words :  "Cursed  be  Canaan.  A  servant  of  ser- 
vants shall  he  be  unto  his  brethren."  To  the  same  effect 
is  the  Declaration  of  Jephtha,  in  Judges  11 :  24 :  "Whom- 
soever Yahweh,  our  god,  hath  dispossessed  before  us,  them 
will  we  possess." 

Thus  it  begins  to  be  plain  that  Israel  was  no  excep- 
tion to  the  law  which  we  have  put  forward  as  a  mighty 
factor  in  social  development.  In  our  examination  of  this 
interesting  oriental  people  we  must  hold  the  fact  of  cleav- 
age in  full  view  in  all  its  wide  significance.  To  the  trained 
eye,  the  phenomena  of  cleavage  will  stand  out  conspicu- 
ously through  all  the  course  of  Israel's  history. 

§  63.  —  The  political  disintegration  which  we  have 
noticed  in  Canaan  before  the  Conquest  made  it  possible 
for  the  people  of  Yahweh  to  break  up  into  their  tribal 
groups,  and  undertake  the  subjugation  of  the  country  in 
detail.  Herein  we  see  the  anarchical  period  of  the 
"Judges,"  when  the  people  were  not  yet  permanently 
united  in  a  single  nation  under  a  king. 

Since  they  were  not  compelled  to  maintain  a  general 
organization,  the  general  religion  of  Israel,  tended  to  fall 
into  neglect.  Notice  again  how  the  religious  and  politi- 
cal conditions  of  early  society  are  bound  up  together.  Yah- 
weh, the  covenant  deity,  was  the  one,  general  god  of  Is- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  116 

rael;  and  the  fate  of  his  worship  hung  upon  the  realiza- 
tion of  an  Israelite  nationality.  If,  at  this  early  stage  in 
its  history,  Israel  should  be  permanently  subjugated,  the 
religion  of  Yahweh  would  be  cast  aside  and  forgotten. 
Under  the  actual  conditions,  however,  Yahweh  was  not, 
and  could  not  be,  wholly  forgotten  either  by  the  Israelites 
or  the  Canaanites.  His  worship  went  forward  at  the  al- 
tars in  different  parts  of  the  country ;  and  the  thought  in 
the  background  of  the  consciousness  of  Israelite  and  Cana- 
anite  alike  w^as:  "Yahweh  is  the  one,  general  god  of  Is- 
rael. He  has  led  Israel  out  of  Egypt  —  that  great  coun- 
try ;  —  and  has  therefore  defeated  the  gods  of  Egypt.  He 
has  not  only  done  this,  but  he  has  given  Israel  victories 
and  a  foothold  in  this  land.  He  must,  therefore,  be  a  great 
and  powerful  god.''  If  a  united  Israel,  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Yahweh,  had  conquered  a  united  Canaan  under  the 
leadership  of  some  other  general  god,  then  the  general  god 
of  Canaan  would  have  been  defeated  with  his  followers; 
and  Yahweh  would  have  risen  at  once  to  a  higher  place 
than  he  actually  occupied  during  the  period  of  the  Judges. 
If  we  say  that  Yahweh  had  no  immediate  power  to  be- 
come the  preeminent  "god  of  the  land,"  we  merely  express 
in  theological  terms  the  fact  that  Israel  had  no  immediate 
power  to  form  a  nation  within  the  land. 

§  64.  —  In  the  third  chapter  of  Judges  we  read  that 
^^the  children  of  Israel  dwelt  among  the  Canaanites;" 
and  that  "they  took  their  daughters  to  be  their  wives,  and 
gave  their  own  daughters  to  their  sons,  and  served  their 
gods."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  subjugation  of  the  Cana- 
anite  inhabitants  by  the  Israelite  intruders  was  but  a  par- 
tial one.  After  the  Israelites  had  settled  down  in  the 
agricultural  districts,  leaving  the  Canaanites  mostly  in 
the  towns,  there  were  treaties  and  intermarriages  between 
the  two.  Of  this,  however,  more  in  due  order.  At  pres- 
ent, we  are  concerned  with  its  theological  aspect.  As  the 
records  indicate,  the  worship  of  Yahweh  was  gradually 
associated  with,  but  not  superseded  by,  that  of  the  local 
deities  of  the  Canaanites. 


116  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

It  needs  to  be  emphasized  that  this  was  perfectly 
natural  under  the  circumstances.  Israel  and  Yahweh  had 
indeed  gained  a  foothold  in  the  country,  and  had  won 
victories  over  the  Canaanites  and  their  local  gods;  but 
they  had  neither  driven  out  nor  annihilated  the  Canaan- 
ites, and  hence  had  neither  driven  out  nor  permanently  de- 
feated their  gods,  or  ^'baalim."  The  baalim  of  Canaan 
were  the  gods  of  a  settled  and  comparatively  civilized 
population,  which  was  agricultural  and  commercial, 
rather  than  military,  in  character;  and  these  gods,  of 
course,  reflected  the  nature  of  their  worshippers.  On  the 
other  hand,  Yahweh  was  a  god  of  militant  barbarians 
who  were  fresh  from  the  desert.  He  was  a  "god  of  hosts, 
mighty  in  battle,''  as  the  Old  Testament  sometimes  de- 
scribes him.  He  was  the  dreadful  god  of  Sinai,  enthroned 
on  the  black  thunder  clouds.  And  while  he  was  wor- 
shipped on  important  occasions,  and  held  as  a  military 
reserve,  so  to  speak,  it  was  inevitable  that  the  pastoral 
Israelites,  when  settling  down  and  making  treaties  and 
marriages  with  the  agricultural  and  commercial  inhabit- 
ants of  the  land,  should  recognize  and  worship  the  local 
baalim.  For  the  Israelites  were  anxious  to  learn  the  arts 
of  agriculture  and  settled  life;  and  to  obtain  success 
therein  it  was  thought  necessary  to  serve,  not  a  military 
god,  but  the  more  civilized  gods  who  had  plainly  given 
wealth  and  success  in  life  to  a  settled  population.  Ac- 
cording to  the  standard  of  that  age,  the  service  of  the 
local  baalim  was  no  disloyalty  to  Yahweh,  the  general  god 
of  Israel.  The  local  baalim  were  worshipped  only  in  a 
subsidiary  capacity.  Israel  did  not  recognize  any  god 
who  could  compete  with  Yahweh  in  his  own  peculiar 
field.  His  w^orship  was  associated  with  that  of  the  local 
baalim  just  as  it  was  with  the  worship  of  the  teraphim, 
or  little  family  gods.  The  service  of  these  household 
gods  by  people  like  Micah  the  Ephraimite,  and  David 
and  his  wife  Michal,  and  all  the  rest  of  Israel,  did  not 
imply  the  denial  of  Yahweh  as  the  general  god  of  Israel. 
In  the  same  way,  the  recognition  of  the  local  Canaanite 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  117 

gods  involved  no  disloyalty  to  the  god  who  had  delivered 
his  chosen  people  from  Egypt;  and  as  the  facts  now  to 
be  noticed  prove,  he  was  still  regarded  as  preeminently 
the  god  of  Israel  (47). 

§  65.  —  After  the  people  of  Yahv/eh  had  entered 
Canaan,  other  attacks  were  made  upon  the  land  by  still 
other  outsiders.  As  the  Israelites  gradually  settled  down 
in  the  country  districts,  leaving  the  Canaanites  mainly 
in  the  towns  and  their  vicinity,  these  attacks  by  out- 
siders proved  to  be  troublesome  not  only  to  the  Israelites 
but  to  the  Canaanites  as  well.  Enemies  from  without  the 
land  had  no  reason  for  making  a  permanent  distinction 
between  Canaan  and  Israel,  for  they  were  the  enemies  of 
all  the  people  in  the  territory  they  coveted.  This  at 
length  had  the  effect  of  creating  a  community  of  inter- 
est and  feeling  between  the  older  and  newer  inhabitants 
of  the  land. 

It  was,  indeed,  attacks  by  the  troublesome  Philis- 
tines and  Ammonites  that  finally  welded  Israel  and 
Canaan  into  a  single  mass.  And  they  were  rallied 
against  these  enemies  —  how?  Assuredly,  not  in  the 
name  of  any  one  of  the  local  baalim,  for  none  of  these 
gods  had  a  general  jurisdiction.  The  only  god  wor- 
shipped in  Canaan  who  had  a  general  jurisdiction  was 
Yahweh,  the  god  of  hosts,  mighty  in  battle,  whom  the 
Israelites  held  as  a  sort  of  military  reserve.  The  combined 
Israelites  and  Canaanites  were  therefore  rallied  against 
their  common  enemies  in  the  name  of  none  other  than 
Yahweh,  who  had  defeated  the  powerful  gods  of  Egypt, 
and  given  Israel  a  foothold  in  Canaan.  Henceforth  we 
hear  no  more  about  conflicts  between  Israel  and  Canaan. 
The  tedious  formative  period  of  the  Judges  at  length 
passed  away;  and  a  national  state  was  founded  under 
the  headship  of  king  Saul  and  his  successors,  in  the  name 
of  Yahweh,  god  of  Israel.  "The  old  population,"  writes 
Wellhausen,  "slowly  became  amalgamated  with  the  new. 
In  this  way  the  Israelites  received  a  very  important  ac- 
cession to  their  numbers.     In  Deborah's  time  the  fighting 


118  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

men  of  Israel  numbered  40,000;  the  tribe  of  Dan,  when 
it  migrated  to  Laish,  counted  600  warriors;  Gideon  pur- 
sued the  Midianites  with  300.  But  in  the  reigns  of  Saul 
and  David  we  find  a  population  reckoned  by  millions. 
The  rapid  increase  is  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  incor- 
poration of  the  Canaanites"   (48). 

The  situation  here  developed  calls  for  close  attention. 
As  Wellhausen  observes,  the  assimilation  of  the  older  and 
the  newer  inhabitants  of  the  land  never  had  the  effect  of 
making  Israelites  Canaanites;  but,  on  the  contrary,  it 
made  Canaanites  Israelites  (49).  This  is  a  very  nice  point, 
turning  obviously  on  the  politico-religious  phase  of  the 
situation.  The  original  Israelite  tribes  intruded  them- 
selves into  the  life  of  Canaan  in  somewhat  the  same  way 
that  the  Normans  intruded  themselves  into  the  life  of 
England.  It  is  true,  we  hasten  to  say,  that  the  Israelites 
placed  their  name  on  the  land  they  conquered;  while  the 
Normans  did  not  turn  England  into  a  Normandy.  But 
the  difference  between  the  two  situations  is  rather  one 
of  form  than  of  substance;  and  this  is  just  the  point 
that  w^e  are  trying  to  bring  out.  Prior  to  the  Norman 
Conquest,  England  had  a  national  organization  of  her 
own.  Norman  life  simply  flowed  into  the  mould  offered 
by  English  life;  and  Normans  thus  became  Englishmen. 
"As  early  as  the  days  of  Henry  the  Second,"  writes  Green, 
"the  descendants  of  Norman  and  Englishman  had  be- 
come indistinguishable.  Both  found  a  bond  in  a  com- 
mon English  feeling  and  English  patriotism"  (50). 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  Canaan,  as  we  have  re- 
peatedly observed,  had  neither  a  national  organi- 
zation nor  a  national  religion.  So  that  in  this 
case  it  was  the  incomers,  and  not  the  original  in- 
habitants, that  furnished  the  national  mould,  or  matrix, 
wherein  the  corporate  life  of  the  mingled  peoples  could 
run.  Thus  the  Canaanites,  the  earlier  inhabitants  of 
the  land,  became  Israelites. 

Partly  from  a  natural  and  naive  tendency  of  mind 
which  predisposes  men  to  exalt  the  simple  and  the  dra- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  119 

matic  over  the  complex  and  the  prosaic,  and  partly  as  a 
matter  of  pride,  the  resulting  mixed  race  magnified  its 
descent  from  the  conquering  Israelite  stock,  and  rapidly 
forgot  its  Canaanite  ancestry.  In  coming  years  the  in- 
vasion of  the  land  by  the  tribes  of  Israel  projected  it- 
self into  bold  relief  against  the  historical  background, 
while  the  silent,  prosaic  intermingling  of  the  races  made 
no  impression  on  the  popular  mind.  Everybody,  of 
course,  wanted  to  be  known  as  descended  from  the  con- 
querors and  not  from  the  conquered.  In  later  generations 
these  tendencies  logically  issued  in  the  tradition  that 
their  ancestors  came  into  the  country  and  dispossessed 
the  alien  Canaanites.  This  is,  indeed,  one  of  the  stock 
ideas  of  the  uncritical  Bible  reader  of  today;  and  unless 
we  take  the  trouble  to  look  below  the  surface,  and  hold 
the  basic  elements  of  the  situation  steadily  in  mind,  it 
neatly  conceals  a  number  of  important  sociological  facts. 

In  marriages  between  the  old  and  the  new  inhabitants 
of  the  land,  it  is  plain  that  alliances  would  be  contracted 
largely  between  the  families  of  the  Israelite  chiefs  and 
elders,  who  had  seized  the  undefended  agricultural  dis- 
tricts, and  the  families  of  the  Canaanite  upper  class, 
which  resided  principally  in  the  towns.*  The  mixture 
of  the  races,  however,  would  be  effected  in  many  other 
ways,  regular  and  irregular. 

At  the  outset,  the  balance  of  power  in  the  new  Is- 
raelite nation  lay  naturally  with  the  country  aristocracy, 
which  was  of  the  most  pure  Israelite  blood.  Accordingly, 
it  is  the  country,  with  its  agricultural  interests,  that  we 
hear  of  more  than  of  the  city  during  the  early  life  of  Israel 
in  Canaan.  Gideon,  as  we  have  incidentally  observed,  was 
a  clan  chief  in  the  agricultural  districts.     Saul,  before 

*  Perhaps  a  typical  marriage  of  this  kind  was  that  between  Gideon, 
an  Israelite  clan  chief,  and  a  woman  of  the  Canaanite  city  of  Shechem 
(Judges  8:  31  and  9).  The  issue  of  this  union  was  the  ill-fated  Abimelech. 
It  was  Gideon's  family,  by  the  way,  that  headed  the  first,  abortive  at- 
tempt to  avoid  the  evils  of  the  troubled  age  of  the  Judges  by  founding  a 
monarchy.     Strictly,  Saul  was  not  the  first  king  in  Israel. 


120  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

his  election  to  the  throne,  busies  himself  in  directing  the 
affairs  of  the  family  estate  in  the  country.  David,  the 
next  king,  begins  life  as  a  shepherd  boy ;  and,  in  the  early 
part  of  his  career,  marries  the  widow  of  a  rich  country 
landlord. 

But  intermarriages  between  the  Israelite  and  Cana- 
anite  upper  classes  presently  produced  families  which  in- 
herited both  city  and  country  property.  This  tended  to 
carry  the  balance  of  power  into  the  cities,  which  were 
wealthy  long  before  the  Conquest.  The  shifting  of  the 
center  of  influence  in  this  direction  probably  became  no- 
ticeable even  in  the  reign  of  David.  At  a  later  period  in 
his  career  he  brought  the  city  of  Jerusalem  into  promin- 
ence, and  identified  himself  with  it  so  closely  that  it  be- 
came known  as  "the  city  of  David."  The  third  king, 
Solomon,  was  wholly  a  city  man ;  and  under  him  we  may 
imagine  the  process  of  amalgamation  as  being  complete, 
and  the  balance  of  power  —  at  least,  of  economic  power 
—  as  on  the  way  toward  permanent  location  in  the  cities 
of  Oanaanitish  Israel. 

§  66.  —  A  fact  which  calls  for  emphatic  notice 
emerges  into  view  at  this  point.  The  history  of  "Israel'' 
in  Canaan  must  be  regarded,  not  as  later  chapters  in 
the  history  of  the  original  Israelitish  tribes,  but  rather 
as  a  continuation  of  the  prior  history  of  Canaan.  From 
the  standpoint  of  science,  the  phrase  "history  of  Israel," 
as  commonly  understood,  is  misleading.  The  Israelite 
invasion  brought  a  temporary,  backset  to  the  country; 
but  after  the  races  had  been  peacefully  united  under  the 
kings,  the  resulting  progress  which  we  associate  with  the 
names  of  David  and  Solomon,  was  really  Canaanite  pro- 
gress under  the  name  and  style  of  Israel.  We  should 
realize,  then,  that  we  are  studying  the  history  of  society 
in  Canaan  rather  than  merely  the  history  of  Israel.  If 
we  continue  the  subject  under  the  impression  that  we  are 
simply  studying  the  later  history  of  the  original  tribes  of 
Israel,  we  delude  ourselves  in  the  same  fashion  as  when 
we  loosely  imagine  that  the  Israelites  took  possssion  of 


1^ 

ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  121 

Canaan  and  "drove  out"  the  earlier  inhabitants.  Both 
of  these  ideas  are  conventional  conceptions  which  hide 
serious  facts  to  which  we  must  frequently  recur. 

§  67.  —  But  since  primitive  politics  and  religion  go 
together,  it  is  necessary  to  turn  once  more  to  the  religious 
aspect  of  this  history. 

We  have  seen  that  Yahweh  w^as  once  a  tribal  god. 
But  the  rise  of  Canaanitish  Israel  brought  with  it  the 
rise  of  Yahweh  among  the  gods  of  the  nations  —  that  is, 
in  the  minds  of  his  worshippers.  Let  us  try  to  study  the 
religious  psychology  of  Israel  under  the  united  monarchy, 
during  the  "golden  age"  of  David  and  Solomon. 

First  of  all,  perhaps,  there  was  the  imposing  tradi- 
tion that  Yahweh  had  chosen  Israel,  defeated  the  gods  of 
Egypt  on  their  behalf,  and  given  them  the  land  of  Canaan. 
We  have  seen  how  much  and  how  little  basis  there  was 
for  this;  but  it  was  taken  more  and  more  at  its  face 
value.  Its  dramatic  force  increased  with  the  passage  of 
time  as  the  Canaanite  side  of  the  nation's  ancestry  be- 
came lost  in  the  Israelitish  descent  of  the  mingled  people. 
The  Philistines  on  the  southwest  were  so  effectually  chas- 
tized that  they  ceased  to  harass  the  Israelites.  Therefore 
Dagon,  the  god  of  the  defeated  Philistines,  had  been  de- 
feated by  Yahweh,  and  must  take  a  lower  place  than  the 
god  of  the  victorious  Israelites.  Furthermore,  the  Moa- 
bites,  the  Ammonites,  the  Edomites,  and  the  Syrians,  or 
Arameans,  located  on  the  east  and  northeast,  were  de- 
feated and  put  to  tribute  by  Israel.  The  nomadic  Amale- 
kites  were  also  severely  chastized.  Therefore  the  gods 
of  all  these  peoples  fell  below  the  level  of  the  great 
deity  of  Israel,  who  was  plainly  showing  himself  to  be  a 
god  of  hosts,  or  armies,  mighty  in  battle.  The  commercial 
Phoenicians  on  the  northwest  were  not  a  warlike  race; 
and  since  they  never  came  into  hostile  contact  with  Yah- 
weh's  people,  their  gods  did  not  at  first  impress  the  reli- 
gious consciousness  of  Canaanitish  Israel.  The  Babylon- 
ians, having  long  ago  retreated  to  their  distant  homeland, 
were  too  far  away  to  exercise  any  influence  on  the  imagin- 


122  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


ation  of  Israel  during  its  formative  period.  And  since  the 
Assyrian  kingdom  had  not  at  this  time  grown  powerful 
enough  to  throw  its  armies  upon  the  Mediterranean  sea- 
board, out  of  sight  was  out  of  mind  in  this  case  also. 
Thus  Yahweh  had  proved  his  superiority  over  all  gods 
with  whom  he  had  actually  come  into  contact ;  and  it  was^ 
a  natural  inference  that,  if  he  chose,  he  could  as  easily 
defeat  the  gods  of  the  nations  with  whom  Israel  had  not 
so  far  come  into  relation. 

Thus  we  see  how  the  circumstances  of  this  period  ex- 
alted the  idea  of  the  power  of  Yahweh,  especially  in  the 
minds  of  his  Israelite  worshippers.  The  growth  of  Yah- 
weh —  or  more  exactly,  the  growth  of  the  idea  of  Yahweh 
—  was  the  religious  aspect  of  the  increasing  political 
importance  of  the  newly  founded  nation  of  Israel.  Of 
course,  the  relative  importance  of  Israel  in  the  world  was 
less  than  the  Israelite  imagined  it  to  be;  and  in  the  same 
way  the  greatness  of  Yahweh  would  bulk  larger  in  the 
mind  of  the  Israelite  than  to  the  eyes  of  the  world  out- 
side. We  are  studying  Yahweh,  however,  not  as  he  ap- 
peared to  the  outside  world,  but  as  he  existed  in  the  con- 
sciousness of  his  people. 

The  atmosphere  in  which  the  Israelite  found  himself 
in  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon  was,  indeed,  w^ell 
fitted  to  give  rise  to  expansive  ideas  about  the  importance 
and  destiny  of  Israel,  and,  therefore,  of  the  greatness  of 
his  god  and  the  littleness  of  the  gods  of  other  nations. 
It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  every  ancient  conquering  na- 
tion tended  to  ascribe  to  its  own  god  supremacy  over  the 
gods  of  the  rest  of  the  world.  "Assur  was  supreme  over 
all  other  gods,''  writes  Professor  Sayce,  "as  his  repre- 
sentative, the  Assyrian  king,  was  supreme  over  the  other 
kings  of  the  earth''  (51).  The  same  spirit  of  pride  that 
impels  the  small  boy  to  think  and  assert  that  his  country 
can  defeat  all  other  countries  in  war,  and  that  his  father 
can  whip  the  fathers  of  all  other  boys,  was  naturally  at 
work  in  the  politico-religious  consciousness  of  Israel  at 
this  relatively  happy  period  of  national  poAver  and  glory. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  123^ 

"There  has  probably  never  existed,  in  any  age  or  at  any 
spot  on  the  earth's  surface,"  writes  Mr.  Fiske,  "a  group  of 
people  that  did  not  take  for  granted  its  own  preeminent 
excellence.  Upon  some  such  assumption,  as  upon  an  in- 
controvertible axiom,  all  historical  narratives,  from  the 
chronicles  of  a  parish  to  the  annals  of  an  empire,  alike 
proceed"  (52).  It  is  inductively  probable  that,  just  as 
the  Assyrians,  when  flushed  by  their  military  successes, 
held  the  gods  of  other  nations  in  contempt,  so  the  senti- 
ment grew  up  in  Israel  that  foreign  gods  were  weaklings 
to  be  despised.  It  was,  indeed,  a  part  of  the  duty  of 
every  man  in  ancient  times  to  think  well  of  his  own  god, 
and  ill  of  the  gods  of  others.  If  his  people  were  perma- 
nently conquered  by  another  people,  then,  of  course,  the 
god  of  his  conquerors  was  more  powerful  than  his  own 
god.  But  if,  on  the  contrary,  his  own  people  subjugated 
others,  then  the  latent  tendency  of  every  man  to  think 
well  of  his  own  god  as  a  matter  of  self  interest  was 
brought  into  play  and  justified.  We  must  not  suppose 
that  even  in  the  case  of  a  great  conquering  power  like 
Assyria,  the  tendency  to  magnify  one's  own  god  and  to 
hold  the  gods  of  other  nations  in  contempt,  issued  in 
downright  denial  of  the  existence  of  foreign  deities.  The 
general  god  of  a  conquering  nation  was  thought  by  his 
people  to  hold  the  same  place  of  supremacy  with  refer- 
ence to  foreign  gods  that  his  people  held  with  reference 
to  foreign  peoples.  And  just  as,  in  the  mind  of  the  small 
boy,  the  importance  of  other  nations  than  his  own  tends 
to  drop  toward  the  zero  point,  so,  in  the  thought  of  an- 
cient conquerors,  the  dignity  of  outside  peoples  and  for- 
eign gods  tended  to  diminish  to  the  lowest  point  compati- 
ble with  the  fact  of  their  existence.  The  mere  existence  of 
outside  gods  was  not  denied  —  even  in  Israel  down  to 
the  last,  as  we  shall  see  in  due  time;  but  the  psychology 
of  primitive  conquering  societies  tended  to  magnify  their 
own  gods  in  the  largest  possible  degree,  and  to  minify  the 
gods  of  outsiders  in  the  largest  possible  degree,  thus  open- 
ing a  profound  quantitative  chasm  between  the  religions 


124  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

of  conquerors  and  the  religions  of  the  outside  world.  Al- 
most every  primitive  god,  indeed,  may  be  regarded  as,  in 
a  sense,  potentially  the  god  of  the  whole  earth  and  heaven. 
There  are  no  absolute  limits  to  the  power  of  the  gods  in 
the  minds  of  their  worshippers.  It  is  uncertain  what  a 
god  may  or  may  not  do,  just  as  it  is  uncertain  what  a  man 
may  or  may  not  do.  This  is  especially  true  of  a  covenant 
god,  like  Yahweh,  for  his  worshippers  have  not  grown  up 
with  him;  and  they  are,  therefore,  more  uncertain  about 
him  than  about  gods  with  whom  they  are  more  familiar. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  these  general  tendencies 
were  at  work  in  Israel  during  the  period  here  under  sur- 
vey. They  did  not  produce  the  doctrine  of  an  absolutely 
imperial  god,  such  as  the  later  prophets  proclaimed; 
but  the  foundations  of  that  doctrine  were  laid  in  the 
"golden  age"  of  Israel's  national  history.* 

§  68.  —  It  should  be  emphasized  that  the  enlarged 
idea  of  Yahweh  arose  in  the  common  consciousness  of 
Canaanitish  Israel,  just  as  ideas  about  the  gods  of  other 
nations  grew  in  the  minds  of  their  worshippers.  Yahweh 
had  not  yet  become  a  world-god;  but  he  was  on  the  way 
to  that  exalted  eminence;  and  nobody  could  tell  what  this 
dreadful  covenant  deity  might  do,  nor  how  many  foreign 
gods  he  might  subjugate.  He  grew  in  the  minds  of  his 
people  as  a  reflex  of  the  political  situation.  His  great- 
ness was  obvious.  It  called  for  no  special  revelation  from 
lieaven,  for  anyone  could  see  it. 

But  although  the  greatness  of  Yahweh  needed  not 
the  word  of  revelation,  it  is  inductively  probable  that 
persons  arose  under  the  united  monarchy,  as  well  as  be- 
fore that  time,  to  give  authoritative  expression  to  the 
common   tradition.     Such  persons  were  not  necessarily 

*  Some  readers  may  interpose  here  the  point  that  since  Israel  was 
completely  and  permanently  defeated  at  a  later  period,  and  since  Yahweh 
nevertheless  finally  became  the  imperial  god  of  earth  and  heaven,  the 
line  of  thought  here  working  out  is  inconsistent  with  some  important 
fact  which  we  have  overlooked.  We  leave  this  puzzzle,  however,  to  solve 
itself  at  a  later  stage  of  our  survey. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  12b- 

specialists,  who  did  nothing  save  make  declarations  about 
divine  things.  In  later  Israelite  history  the  function  of 
prophecy,  or  preaching,  or  forthspeaking,  on  behalf  of 
divinity  concentrated  itself  in  specialists  known  as 
"nebiim'^  (translated  "prophets").  But  the  further  back 
we  go  in  Israelite  history  and  in  general  history,  the  more 
common  is  it  for  any  extraordinary  person  to  be  regarded 
as  an  authoritative  source  of  the  divine  word.  In  the 
earlier  history  of  Israel  the  authoritative  word  from  the 
divine,  or  concerning  the  divine,  was  uttered  by  seers, 
priests,  kings,  extraordinary  women  like  Deborah,  and 
leaders  like  Moses,  all  of  whom  combined  in  themselves 
many  functions.  The  prophetic  side  of  the  character  of 
Moses,  for  instance,  is  recognized  by  later  prophets 
( Hosea  12 :  13 ;  Deuteronomy  18 :  15,  18 ;  34 :  10).  At  first, 
the  inspiration  of  deeds  and  of  words  was  thought  to  fall 
upon  the  same  person.  The  political  head  of  the  people 
could  not  only  be  an  inspired  leader  of  action;  he  could 
also  give  out  the  inspired  word.  Moses,  as  just  observed, 
was  regarded  as  a  prophet  in  one  aspect  of  his  character. 
Samuel,  the  last  of  the  judges,  could  be  at  once  judge, 
priest,  and  seer.  A  valuable  editorial  footnote  in  1  Sam- 
uel 9  explains  that  "beforetime  in  Israel,  when  a  man 
went  to  inquire  of  God  [elohirri],  thus  he  said,  Come  and 
let  us  go  to  the  seer  [roeh]  :  for  he  that  is  now  called  a 
prophet  [nahi]  was  beforetime  called  a  seer."  King  Saul 
could  be  "among  the  prophets."  Even  David  and  Solo- 
mon—  more  in  the  eyes  of  later  generations  —  could  be 
regarded  as  giving  out  inspired  words  in  psalm  and 
proverb.  It  is  significant  that  the  prophetic  reputation 
of  kings  David  and  Solomon  should  be  greater  in  the  eyes 
of  posterity  than  of  contemporaries,  for  under  the  united 
monarchy,  in  accordance  with  the  law  of  specialization 
everywhere  at  work  in  development,  prophecy  at  length 
disengaged  itself  from  political  leadership,  and  began  to 
pursue  a  more  independent  course.  Persons  began  to 
come  into  prominence  who  were  specially  known  as  forth- 
speakers  of  Yahweh   (nebiim).    The  names  of  some  sucb 


126  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

individuals,  coming  down  to  us  from  the  period  of  the 
united  kingdom  and  just  subsequent  thereto,  are:  Nathan, 
Ahijah,  Shemaiah,  and  Iddo.  There  are  also  mentioned 
a  number  of  prophets  whose  names  are  not  given. 

None  of  these  prophets  have  left  us  any  writings; 
but  it  was  doubtless  ainong  them  that  the  first  crude 
conceptions  of  Yahweh's  greatness  received  authoritative 
statement.  In  the  early  age  of  the  two  Israelite  kingdoms 
there  were  still  other  prophets  from  whom  we  have  no 
writings  —  men  like  Elijah,  Micaiah  ben  Imlah,  Jehu  ben 
Hanani,  Elisha,  as  well  as  many  who  are  mentioned  but 
not  named;  and  these,  also,  doubtless  had  their  share 
in  defining  the  greatness  of  the  covenant  god  of  Israel. 
The  prophets  of  later  centuries  —  like  Amos,  Isaiah,  and 
Jeremiah,  —  whose  writings  we  possess,  utter  in  terms 
of  increasing  clearness  the  doctrine  of  Yahweh^s  imperial 
supremacy;  but  not  one  of  them  is  conscious  that  this  is 
a  novel  conception,  even  though  we  can  trace  later  stages 
of  its  growth  in  the  writings  of  these  very  prophets.  The 
psychology  of  all  the  literary  prophets  implies  an  ag- 
grandizement of  the  national  god  such  as  can  have  come 
only  before  the  age  of  written  prophecy. 

Several  facts,  then,  taken  together,  make  it  prac- 
tically certain  that  under  the  national  kingdom  Yahweh 
was  authoritatively  declared  to  be  an  imperialistic  god 
by  men  who  were  thought  to  be  in  close  touch  with  him 
and  inspired  by  him.  First,  the  political  history  of  Israel 
exalted  the  idea  of  Yahweh  in  the  consciousness  of  all  his 
worshippers.  In  the  second  place,  prophets  arose  who 
would  naturally  give  expression  to  the  common  idea.  In 
the  third  place,  the  psychology,  or  general  mental  attitude, 
of  the  literary  prophets  of  later  centuries  proves  that 
these  later  men  did  not  regard  themselves  as  innovators. 

§  69.  —  Throughout  this  period,  and  for  centuries  af- 
terward, the  local  baalim,  or  agricultural  and  city  gods 
of  the  earlier  Canaanites,  were  worshipped  in  the  char- 
acter of  minor  deities.  The  service  of  the  baalim  was  con- 
tinued as  a  part  of  the  religion  of  the  people  because 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  127 

of  the  qualified  nature  of  the  Conquest,  as  previously  ex- 
plained. The  baalim  were  symbolic  of  the  Canaanitish 
element  in  the  descent  of  the  mixed  population.  Several 
of  the  agricultural  feasts  held  by  the  earlier  Canaanites 
in  honor  of  these  gods,  as  well  as  the  lewd  practices  in 
<!onnection  with  the  "high  places,^'  were  continued  in  con- 
nection with  the  Yahwism  of  Canaanitish  Israel.  The 
local  gods,  however,  were  not  to  be  compared  to  Yahweh, 
the  god  of  all  Israel ;  and,  as  we  have  already  seen,  theii^ 
worship,  like  that  of  the  teraphim,  was  not  commonly  held 
to  be  inconsistent  with  the  practice  of  the  national  re- 
ligion. 

§  TO. — Canaanitish  Israel  was  a  united  nation  for 
about  100  years  —  through  the  reigns  of  Saul,  David  and 
Solomon.  The  capital  was  fixed  at  Jerusalem  in  the 
south;  and  a  temple  was  built  there  for  the  god  of  Is- 
rael. Peace  and  firm  government  within  the  country 
brought  with  it  social  recovery  and  progress,  and  quickly 
elevated  Israel  to  a  place  among  the  nations.  Oriental 
civilization  was  introduced  —  or,  to  be  more  accurate,  re- 
vived and  stimulated  after  the  temporary  backset  caused 
by  the  Conquest. 

In  the  reign  of  Solomon  friendly  alliances  were  made 
with  surrounding  nations ;  and  since  recognition  of  a  peo- 
ple involved  recognition  of  its  god  (politics  and  religion 
going  hand  in  hand),  altars  were  set  up  in  Israel  for  the 
worship  of  the  deities  of  Egypt,  Phoenicia,  Moab,  and  Am- 
mon  —  probably  on  soil  transported  from  those  countries. 

§  71.  —  But  in  spite  of  the  apparent  prosperity  of  the 
country,  trouble  was  brewing.  The  social  condition  of 
Israel  was  rapidly  assimilated  to  that  of  the  oriental 
world  at  large. 

The  first  dramatic  incident  in  its  decline  occurred 
upon  the  accession  of  Eehoboam  to  the  throne  of  Solomon 
his  father.  The  weight  of  taxation  had  rested  more 
heavily  upon  the  northern  part  of  the  kingdom  than  upon 
Judah  in  the  south,  where  the  seat  of  government  was 
located;  and  Eehoboam  would  consent  to  no  reforms.    In 


128  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

consequence,  the  larger  part  of  the  kingdom  —  the  so- 
called  "ten  tribes"  in  the  north  —  rebelled  against  the 
dynasty  seated  at  Jerusalem.  This  was  about  940  b.  c. 
Thenceforward  there  were  two  lines  of  kings  —  one  for 
Judah  in  the  south  and  one  for  Israel  in  the  north;  and 
all  Israel  was  never  again  politically  united  as  a  nation. 
The  consciousness  of  a  common  origin,  however,  was  not 
forgotten ;  and  Yahweh  was  still  acknowledged  as  the  god 
of  the  sundered  people.* 

The  troubles  of  Israel  now  increased.  Eehoboam 
tried  to  reduce  the  insurrection  in  the  north,  where  Jero- 
boam had  been  chosen  king.  Meanwhile,  Shishak,  who 
was  then  king  of  Egypt,  invaded  Judah.  The  internal 
decay  of  once  powerful  Egypt  was  exposing  it  more  and 
more  to  the  assaults  of  its  enemies.  As  population  multi- 
plied throughout  the  eastern  world,  kingdoms  pressed 
upon  each  other,  nations  rising  and  falling,  with  no  sta- 
bility anywhere,  and  increasing  distress  everywhere.  The 
assault  upon  Judah  by  Egypt  recalled  Rehoboam  to  the 
south,  and  relieved  the  pressure  on  the  north.  Some  years 
later  the  scales  were  turned;  and  the  north,  under  king 
Baasha,  pressed  so  hard  upon  the  southern  kingdom  that 
Asa,  the  son  of  Rehoboam,  was  forced  to  call  upon  king 
Benhadad  of  Damascus  for  help.  And  so  the  tides  of  war 
surged  back  and  forth. 

After  the  division  of  the  kingdom,  the  history  of  Is- 
rael is  a  record  of  gradual  decline,  interrupted  by  oc- 
casional returns  of  apparent  good  fortune,  at  least  for  the 
upper  class.  The  northern  kingdom  was  destined  to  be 
largely  depopulated  by  the  Assyrians,  giving  rise  to  the 
legend  of  the  "ten  lost  tribes."  The  kingdom  of  little 
Judah  was  to  gather  up  into  itself  the  traditions  of  Is- 
rael's history.     Part  of  its  population  were  at  length  to 

*  In  respect  of  the  terms  "Israel"  and  "Judah"  the  usage  varies  in 
the  Old  Testament  literature ;  but  in  the  present  inquiry  this  point  need 
not  be  enlarged  upon.  The  Judahites  were  Israelites  in  a  broad  sense; 
but  after  the  division  the  term  "Israel"  was,  apptied  to  them  only  on  the 
more  formal  occasions. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  129 

be  exiled.  Of  these,  again,  part  were  to  return ;  and,  un- 
der the  name  of  "Jews,"  to  erect  a  little  ecclesiastical 
state,  subject  for  the  most  part  now  to  one  power  and  now 
to  another,  and  ultimately  to  be  destroyed  by  the  Roman 
arms. 

Thus  we  see  that  the  kingdom  which  came  so  tri- 
umphantly into  the  light  of  history,  under  the  glorious 
leadership  of  the  terrible  covenant  god  Yahweh,  pursued 
a  comparatively  brief  career  before  its  best  days  were 
over.  We  hardly  trace  its  rise  before  we  chronicle  its 
commencing  decline. 

§  72.  —  The  evil  turn  in  the  fortunes  of  Canaanitish 
Israel  resulted  at  length  in  a  great  religious  ferment 
which,  advancing  through  ever  widening  circles,  has  in- 
fluenced the  later  religious  history  of  the  entire  civilized 
world.  We  have  seen  that  the  rise  of  Yahwism  was  con- 
nected with  the  rise  of  Israel  among  the  nations;  and  it 
is  manifest  that  the  later  religious  ferment  which  we  are 
presently  to  study  was  equally  based  upon  material  de- 
cline. 

The  central  question  is.  What  was  it  that  brought 
trouble  upon  the  country?  What  was  it  that  caused  the 
decline  of  Israel?  Was  it  the  increasing  attacks  by  out- 
siders? Or  was  it  internal  conditions?  Or  was  it  a  com- 
bination of  internal  and  external  causes?  Or,  more 
broadly  and  simply,  was  it  a  local  manifestation  of  the 
general  social  decay  then  creeping  over  the  entire 
oriental  world? 

The  evidence  upon  which  our  general  thesis  is  based 
leads  us  to  support  the  affirmative  side  of  the  latter 
form  of  the  question.  It  will  be  recalled,  indeed,  that  our 
entire  digression  upon  the  history  of  Israel  is  based  on 
the  view  that  this  history  brings  out  to  good  effect  the 
general  conditions  of  the  oriental  social  problem. 

§  73.  —  As  troubles  thickened,  and  the  period  of  the 
united  kingdom  receded  into  the  past,  there  grew  up,  as 
was  but  natural,  an  ever  brighter  tradition  of  the  glory 

9 


130  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

and  happiness  of  the  golden  age  under  David  and  Solo- 
mon. We  see  the  marks  of  this  in  1  Kings  4 :  ^^Judah  and 
Israel  were  many,  as  the  sand  which  is  by  the  sea  in  mul- 
titude, eating  and  drinking  and  making  merry.  And 
Judah  and  Israel  dwelt  safely,  every  man  under  his  vine 
and  under  his  fig  tree,  from  Dan  even  to  Beersheba,  all 
the  days  of  Solomon.'^  This  passage  was  composed,  not 
during  the  period  of  the  united  kingdom,  but  after  the 
division,  at  a  time  when  it  had  become  customary  to 
speak  of  the  people  of  Yahweh  under  the  double  form, 
"Judah  and  Israel."  The  tradition  represented  by  the 
passage  was,  of  course,  an  idealizing  tradition;  but  that 
made  no  difference.  Distance  often  obscures  details,  and 
lends  enchantment  to  the  view.  When  we  are  in  difficulty 
we  always  like  to  erect  some  standard  of  perfection  to 
which  we  can  refer  as  an  ideal.  If  our  earlier  experiences 
have  realized  any  of  this  ideal,  we  tend  to  paint  the 
former  times  in  the  brightest  colors ;  to  set  the  apparently 
happy  past  over  against  the  unhappy  present;  and  to 
accept  the  resulting  tradition  of  an  earlier  golden  age  at 
its  full  face  value.  The  passage  here  taken  from  1  Kings 
4  shows  all  the  marks  of  a  characteristic  idealization  of 
earlier  history.  Notice  that  all  its  terms  go  to  extremes. 
"In  the  good  old  days,''  it  says  in  eflect/' everybody  dwelt 
safely,  every  man  under  his  oivn  vine  and  fig  tree,  from 
one  extreme  of  the  country  to  the  other  —  from  Dan  in  the 
north  to  Beersheba  in  the  south.  There  were  so  many 
people  that  they  could  not  be  counted.  They  were  like 
the  sand  by  the  sea,  or  the  stars  of  the  heaven,  in  multi- 
tude; and  they  were  all  eating,  and  drinking,  and  mak- 
ing merry."  More  specific  imi)lications  of  this  passage 
will  be  noticed  later. 

All  that  we  know  about  earlier  and  later  times  points 
to  the  fact  that  internal  social  conditions  grew  steadily 
worse  in  the  century  following  the  division  of  the  king- 
dom. This  was  not  a  result  of  the  division,  but  an  out- 
come of  the  deeper  forces  presently  to  be  studied  with 
care.     In  this  period  it  was  naturally  the  desire  of  the 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  131 

people  of  Canaanitish  Israel  to  return  somehow  to  the 
imagijied  felicity  of  the  past.  But  their  utter  ignorance 
precluded  all  intelligent  effort  looking  to  the  correction 
of  social  abuses;  and  the  century  following  the  division 
has  left  us  no  record  of  any  general  or  positive  move- 
ment of  the  public  mind  in  either  kingdom. 

§  74.  —  In  the  middle  of  the  ninth  century,  however 
(about  850  b.  c),  we  meet  several  unmistakable  signs  that 
public  opinion  was  awakening  slowly  to  a  realization  that 
something  must  be  done. 

Ancient  nations  always  ascribed  their  troubles  to  the 
anger  of  the  gods.  Thus,  in  the  foregoing  quotation  from 
the  Moabite  Stone,  king  Mesha  says,  "Omri,  king  of  Is- 
rael, afflicted  Moab  for  many  days,  because  Chemosh  Avas 
angry  with  his  land.''  The  anger  and  malice  of  the  gods 
was  thought  to  be  due  either  to  some  ritualistic  mistake 
on  the  part  of  their  worshippers,  or  to  their  own  divine 
caprice. 

The  first  tendency  of  the  people  of  Israel,  in  the  midst 
of  their  troubles,  was  to  take  this  conventional  view. 
But  along  with  the  more  primitive,  conventional  idea 
that  Israel's  troubles  were  due  to  the  capricious  desertion 
of  his  people  by  Yahweh  there  grew  up  another  view, 
which  at  length  ripened  into  positive  doctrine. 

Setting  out  from  the  basis  afforded  by  current  tradi- 
tions, the  new  doctrine  advanced  the  startling  claim  that 
Israel's  troubles  were  due,  not  to  the  caprice  of  Yahweh, 
but  to  the  unfaithfulness  of  the  people  to  their  god.  Yah- 
weh had  performed  his  side  of  the  great  contract  made  at 
Mount  Sinai;  but  his  people  had  not  lived  up  to  their 
side  of  it.  Yahweh,  the  greatest  god  on  earth,  beside  whom 
other  gods  were  small,  had  chosen  Israel  when  it  was  in 
trouble,  delivered  it  from  Egypt,  made  a  contract  with 
it,  conquered  the  land  of  Canaan  for  it,  driven  out  the 
inhabitants  before  its  face,  given  every  man  his  own  vine 
and  fig  tree,  and  subjugated  surrounding  nations.  But 
what  had  Israel  rendered  unto  Yahweh  in  return  for  all 
these  benefits?    Israel  had  served  the  baalim,  the  gods  of 


132  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

the  former  inhabitants  of  the  country!  Israel  had  raised 
altars  and  built  temples  in  honor  of  foreign  gods  in  the 
very  land  which  Yahweh  had  so  graciously  conquered 
for  his  chosen  people!  Israel  had  been  tried  by  a  good 
god  and  found  wanting.  Yahweh  had  done  more  than  was 
demanded  by  his  part  of  the  contract.  He  had  given  good 
measure,  pressed  down,  shaken  together,  and  running 
over.  Let  Israel  return  to  the  worship  of  Yahweh,  accord- 
ing to  the  pure  and  simple  service  of  the  wilderness  days^ 
abhorring  contact  with  the  local  baalim  and  the  gods  of 
other  nations;  and  then  Yahweh  would  once  more  smile 
upon  his  people,  restore  prosperity  to  the  land  of  Israel, 
and  give  every  man  his  own  vine  and  fig  tree. 

The  new  view  was  not  less  primitive  than  the  old; 
but  its  force  lay  in  the  fact  that  its  opponents  had  no 
means  of  overthrowing  it.  The  advocate  of  the  old,  con- 
ventional theology  might  claim  that  the  troubles  of  Israel 
were  proof  positive  that  Yahweh  had  "hidden  his  face 
from  his  people.''  To  this  the  new  school  would  reply  by 
admitting  the  conventional  claim  in  so  far  as  it  connected 
Israel's  misfortunes  with  the  will  of  Yahweh ;  but  the  new 
school  would  add  the  important  qualification  that  Yah- 
weh had  brought  trouble  upon  Israel,  not  out  of  mere 
caprice,  like  the  gods  of  other  nations,  but  as  a  punish- 
ment, according  to  the  immutable  decrees  of  his  di- 
vine justice.  Indeed,  the  new  view  would  press  hotly  on 
to  the  conclusion  that  Yahweh  would  not  be  the  great  god 
that  he  had  proved  himself  to  be,  and  that  all  Israel  had 
admitted  him  to  be,  if  he  had  not  brought  just  this  pun- 
ishment upon  his  chosen  people.  His  many  benefits  when 
Israel  had  not  deserved  them  in  the  first  place,  had 
proved  his  willingness  to  live  up  to  the  divine  side  of  the 
contract;  and  if  he  had  continued  these  benefits  indefi- 
nitely, while  Israel  still  worshipped  other  gods  and  re- 
fused him  the  undivided  service  that  he  had  given  his 
chosen  people,  then  he  would  have  been  mocking  himself ! 
All  these  doctrines  were  logical  deductions  from  the 
premises  afforded  by  current  traditions.     Grant  the  tra- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  133 

ditions;  and  the  deductions  followed.  King  Mesha  might 
ascribe  the  troubles  of  Moab  to  the  capricious  anger  of 
Chemosh;  but  this  view  would  not  hold  in  the  case  of 
Israel  and  Yahweh.  Israel's  god  had  brought  trouble 
upon  his  people  as  a  just  punishment.  History  had 
proved  that  he  was  willing  to  do  them  good.  The  new 
school  would  cite  the  Sinai  covenant,  and  all  the  good- 
ness of  an  electing  god;  and  the  old  school  could  not 
deny  these  propositions,  for  they  were  affirmed  in  com- 
mon by  the  old  and  the  new.  Then  the  new  school  would 
ask,  "Is  it  not  true  that  Israel  has  worshipped,  and  is 
now  serving,  the  baalim  of  the  former  inhabitants  of  the 
country,  and  that  Israel  has  officially  recognized  the  gods 
of  other  nations  by  building  altars  and  temples  to  them 
in  the  very  land  that  Yahweh  has  conquered?"  And  to 
this,  also,  the  old  school  would  be  obliged  to  give  an 
affirmative  answer.  Then  the  new  school  would  tri- 
umphantly put  the  final  question,  "Is  it  not  true  that  hap- 
piness was  the  result  of  Yahweh's  faithfulness  to  Israel, 
while  trouble  has  followed  Israel's  persistent  unfaithful- 
ness to  Yahweh  in  mixing  and  confusing  his  worship  with 
the  service  of  other  gods?  Yahweh  chose  Israel  in  pre- 
ference to  all  the  peoples  of  the  earth;  and  Israel  must 
likewise  cleave  to  him,  putting  away  all  other  gods  from 
before  his  face,  for  he  is  a  jealous  god." 

This  doctrine,  together  with  a  moral  element  that 
will  emerge  into  view  later,  may  possibly  have  been  stated 
in  embryonic  form  by  Moses.  At  all  events,  it  now  first 
came  into  great  public  prominence;  and  we  are  inclined 
to  think  that  any  ascription  of  the  full  blown  form  of  it 
to  Moses,  or  to  anybody  before  the  first  age  of  the  two 
kingdoms,  is  a  reading  backward  of  later  ideas  into  an 
earlier  time.  The  historical  point,  however,  is  not  im- 
portant here;  and  we  leave  it  to  such  settlement  as  it  may 
find  within  or  without  the  present  inquiry. 

The  new  theology  did  not  by  any  means  take  the  pub 
lie  at  once  by  storm.    The  great  desideratum  was  to  make 
the  people  think.     The  old  theology  was  consistent  with 


134  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  religious  habits  of  the  entire  primitive  world.  Lazy 
and  easy  going,  it  persisted  in  Israel  down  to  the  last. 
But  the  new  view  gathered  strength  with  age,  and  rose  up 
to  combat  the  old. 

§  75.  —  The  new  view  seems  to  have  been  crystallized 
out  of  the  indefinite  religious  ferment  of  the  time  by  the 
policy  of  king  Ahab  of  the  northern  Israelite  kingdom. 
He  married  Jezebel,  daughter  of  Etbaal,  the  king  of  Tyre; 
and  in  honor  of  his  wife,  her  country,  and  her  god,  the 
Tyrian  baal,  Ahab  had  a  temple  erected  at  Samaria,  his 
capital  city.  That  he  still  recognized  Yahweh  as  the  gen- 
eral god  of  Israel  is  made  evident  by  the  fact  that  the 
children  born  to  him  and  Jezebel  were  given  names  com- 
pounded with  that  of  the  Israelite  god.  Their  daughter 
was  named  Athaliah,  or  Athal-yah,  which  means,  "Yah- 
weh is  great."  One  of  their  sons  was  named  Jehoram, 
or  Yah-ram,  which  means,  "Yahweh  is  high."  Another 
son  was  named  Ahaziah,  or  Ahaz-yah,  which  means,  "He 
whom  Yahweh  supports."  Not  only  did  Ahab  acknow- 
ledge the  national  god  in  the  names  of  his  children;  but 
he  also  acknowledged  Yahweh  by  consulting  many  of  the 
prophets  of  the  Israelite  god,  as  in  1  Kings  22.  In  build- 
ing a  temple  to  the  Tyrian  baal,  Ahab  intended  no  dis- 
loyalty to  the  great  god  of  Israel.  His  policy  was  nothing 
new.  Politics  and  religion  went  hand  in  hand.  Recog- 
nition of  a  foreign  people  involved  recognition  of  its  god 
as  a  matter  of  course ;  and  so  far  as  Israel  was  concerned, 
the  great  Solomon  had  set  a  precedent  for  this  very  thing 
in  the  days  of  the  united  kingdom.  But  the  days  of  Ahab 
were  not  the  days  of  Solomon;  and  public  opinion  was 
preparing  slowly  for  the  new  doctrine. 

§  76.  —  In  due  time  appeared  the  first  great  champion 
of  the  new  theology.  The  heroic  figure  of  Elijah,  or  Eli- 
yah,  whose  name  signifies,  "Yahweh  is  the  god,"  looms  up 
in  tremendous  proportions  amid  the  mists  and  shadows 
of  his  age.  His  name  echoes  in  the  Old  Testament  litera- 
ture and  resounds  in  the  books  of  the  New  Testament. 
We  cannot  for  a  moment  suppose  that  the  new  theology 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  135 

was  the  creation  of  Elijah.  Nor  can  we  assume  that  the 
increasing  agitation  of  the  public  mind,  which  first  be- 
comes generally  noticeable  in  his  time,  was  due  merely 
to  him.  "Prophets  do  not  speak  until  they  must,"  says 
Dr.  Bruce,  very  truly.  "They  do  not  arise  until  they  are 
sorely  needed,  and  then  they  come  and  give  voice  to  the 
burden  that  is  on  the  heart  of  all  like  minded  with  them- 
selves" (53).  The  prophet  who  makes  an  impression 
upon  his  contemporaries  is  not  the  only  white  sheep  in  a 
flock  of  black  sheep.  The  leader  of  thought,  like  the 
leader  of  action  (and  the  two  are  much  the  same)  gives  per- 
sonal expression  to  the  forces  at  work  in  the  society 
around  him.  He  does  not  make  the  social  movement ;  but 
the  movement  makes  him. 

Politics  and  religion  being  united,  it  is  obvious  that 
the  religious  consciousness,  at  the  least  reckoning,  is  one 
phase,  or  aspect,  of  the  social  consciousness.  Therefore 
the  testimony  of  the  religious  consciousness  to  the  great 
importance  of  the  prophet  Elijah  is  an  authoritative 
"source"  of  the  first  rank  in  the  study  of  Israelite  history 
and  sociology.  In  the  centuries  lying  between  the  time 
of  Moses,  the  founder  of  political  Israel,  and  the  times  now 
under  survey,  no  figure  looms  up  like  Elijah.  This  man, 
indeed,  can  be  regarded  only  as  the  first  great  representa- 
tive of  that  notable  succession  of  prophets,  or  "preachers," 
who,  in  the  name  of  Yahweh,  undertook  the  concrete 
application  of  the  new  theology.  It  is  not  Samuel,  nor 
Ahijah,  nor  Amos,  nor  Hosea,  nor  Isaiah,  nor  Jeremiah, 
but  Elijah  who  is  to  appear  before  the  final  cataclysm  of 
the  great  and  dreadful  "Day  of  Yahweh"  (Malachi  4:  5). 
And  it  is  not  these  other  prophets,  but  Elijah^  again, 
whom  the  social  consciousness  deems  worthy  of  associa- 
tion with  Moses,  the  founder  of  political  Israel,  and  Jesus, 
the  founder  of  spiritual  Israel,  in  the  dramatic  scene  of 
the  great  Transfiguration  on  the  Mount  (Matthew  17:3; 
Mark  9:4;   Luke  9  :  30). 

Elijah,  unlike  his  successors  the  literary  prophets, 
has  left  us  no  writings  of  his  own;    and  the  accounts  of 


136  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

him  contained  in  the  books  of  Kings  as  they  now  stand  are 
plainly  encrusted  with  myths,  like  the  accounts  handed 
down  to  us  concerning  many  of  the  famous  characters  of 
ancient  times,  both  inside  and  outside  the  Bible.  But  if 
the  miracle  stories  must  be  given  up,  it  is  very  certain 
that  Elijah  strongly  opposed  the  policy  of  king  Ahab, 
denouncing  the  worship  of  the  Tyrian  baal,  and  probably 
also  the  service  of  the  local  baalim  of  Canaanitish  Israel. 
Elijah  goes  down  into  history,  not  because  he  was  a  physi- 
cal magician,  but  because  he  was  the  first  great  spokes- 
man of  the  new  theology.  It  does  not  seem  probable  that 
he  reached  the  clearness  of  expression  which  we  find  in 
the  famous  writing  prophets  who  lived  in  later  centuries.* 
But  his  platform  contained  in  the  germ  all  the  doc- 
trine of  subsequent  prophecy.  And  just  as  his  views  were 
brought  out  more  clearly  by  later  men,  so  the  problem 
which  the  new  theology  tried  to  solve  became  clearer  in 
its  conditions  and  more  awful  in  its  pressure  during  the 
period  wherein  these  later  men  preached  and  wrote. 

The  most  dramatic  event  in  Elijah's  career  seems  to 
have  been  concerned,  not  with  miraculous  fire  from  heaven, 
but  with  affairs  of  the  earth  in  a  very  literal  sense.  It 
is  in  precisely  the  most  sober  part  of  the  Elijah-narratives 
that  we  find  the  account  of  this  event.  According  to  the 
narrative  alluded  to  ( 1  Kings  21),  one  of  the  smaller  aris- 
tocracy of  Israel,  Naboth  by  name,  owned  a  piece  of  land 
in  the  neighborhood  of  the  palace  of  king  Ahab.  The  king 
tried  to  buy  this  land,  offering  in  exchange  either  another 
piece  of  property  or  the  worth  of  it  in  money.  But  Na- 
both,  who  may  have  been  speculating  for  a  rise,  refused 
to  sell.  Then  queen  Jezeb.el  treacherously  procured  the 
judicial  murder  of  Naboth;  and  Ahab  went  to  take 
possession  of  the  coveted  property.  The  incident  gave 
Elijah  an  opportunity  which  he  was  quick  to  improve. 

*We  recognize  that  the  books  of  the  later  prophets,  as  they  now 
stand  in  the  canon,  have  been  edited  and  enlarged  by  still  later  unknown 
writers  animated  by  the  prophetic  spirit. 


ORIENTAL    CIVILIZATION.  137 

Boldly  making  his  way  into  the  royal  presence  itself,  he 
■confronted  the  king  with  an  awful  curse. 

It  should  be  emphasized  that  the  significance  of  this 
Ahab-Naboth  case  lay  not  alone  in  the  treacherous  and 
violent  manner  in  which  Naboth  was  dispossessed.  The 
treachery  which,  in  this  instance,  attended  the  transfer 
of  land  from  one  of  the  less  conspicuous  upper-class  fami- 
lies to  the  most  conspicuous  upper-class  family  in  the 
kingdom,  was  of  course  unjustifiable;  but  it  throws  out 
into  bold  relief,  as  by  a  lightning  flash,  a  silent  process 
of  economic  concentration  which  has  been  illustrated 
•equally  by  the  oriental,  classic,  and  western  civilizations 
in  their  later  stages.  The  literary  prophets  of  the  follow- 
ing century,  as  we  shall  see  later,  complain  about  this  pro- 
cess in  the  most  bitter  terms.  On  the  law  of  chances, 
the  members  of  the  upper  social  stratum  never  possess 
the  same  amount  of  property  apiece;  and  the  underlying 
economic  conditions  of  society  are  such  that  when  civili 
zation  enters  a  certain  stage  the  upper  class  begins  to 
contract  upon  itself,  as  well  as  to  increase  relatively  in 
wealth  and  powder,  its  weaker  members  being  ruined  and 
forced  into  the  lower  social  stratum.  The  special  signi- 
ficance of  the  idealizing  tradition  about  the  earlier  golden 
age,  wherein  every  man  sat  under  his  own  vine  and  fig 
tree,  will  now  begin  to  become  apparent.  Vines  and  fig 
trees  are  never  planted  in  the  air.  They  are  always  rooted 
in  the  soil.  And  when  the  ownership  of  the  soil  is  con- 
centrating in  fewer  and  fewer  hands,  it  is  plain  that  fewer 
and  fewer  men  can  sit  under  their  oAvn  vines  and  fig  trees, 
and  that  more  and  more  men  will  sigh  regretfully  for  the 
times  of  old.  The  concentration  of  landed  property, 
which  invariably  attends  the  development  of  what  is  popu- 
larly called  "the''  social  problem,  w^as  evidently  going  for- 
ward in  the  age  that  we  are  now  trying  to  study.  Is- 
raelite society  as  a  whole  was  economically  so  backward 
that  public  opinion  made  no  distinction  between  treach- 
erously seizing  an  estate,  as  Ahab  did,  and  foreclosing 
(perhaps  by  violence)  a  mortgage  on  landed  property.    To 


138  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  confused,  ignorant,  and  excited  public  mind  of  the 
time,  the  Ahab-Naboth  case  doubtless  typified  the  entire 
contemporary  process  of  concentration;  and  it  gave  the 
prophet  a  dramatic  text  in  illustration  of  one  of  the  evils 
and  hardships  that  came  hand  in  hand  with  IsraeFs  un- 
faithfulness to  Yahweh. 

It  is  very  probable  that  the  contraction  of  the  upper 
class  and  the  increase  of  its  wealth  had  not  yet  proceeded 
so  far  as  in  the  times  of  the  literary  prophets ;  and  that 
the  majority  of  the  upper  stratum  was  as  yet  composed 
of  less  pretentious  landed  proprietors  and  slaveholders  of 
the  rustic  type.  Only  upon  this  view  can  we  explain  the 
events  that  followed  the  preaching  of  Elijah.  It  made  no 
difference  whether  or  not  the  prophet  were  logical  accord- 
ing to  valid  standards.  In  courageously  denouncing  the 
most  conspicuous  land  monopolist  in  the  kingdom  for 
seizing  the  property  of  one  of  the  smaller  monopolists, 
Elijah  seemed  to  be  championing  the  cause  of  all  those 
whose  land  was  encumbered  by  debt,  or  threatened,  or 
seized,  by  wealthier  creditors.  He  was  evidently  a  potent 
factor  in  converting  the  majority  of  the  landholding  class 
to  the  idea  that  there  was  a  connection  between  Israel's 
unfaithfulness  to  Yahweh  and  the  various  troubles  afflict- 
ing the  country  from  within  and  without. 

§  77.  —  The  results  of  the  movement  whereof  Elijah's 
preaching  was  an  expression  did  not  become  clearly  vis- 
ible until  after  his  death.  His  work  was  continued  by 
his  disciple,  the  prophet  Elisha,  under  whose  ministry  a 
startling  revolution  occurred  in  both  kingdoms.  Ahab 
was  dead;  his  son  Ahaziah,  after  occupying  his  father's 
throne  for  a  short  time,  was  also  deceased ;  and  the  second 
son,  Jehoram,  had  worn  the  crown  of  the  northern  king- 
dom for  a  decade.  We  reproduce  from  2  Kings  9  a  pass- 
age bearing  on  the  revolution : 

"And  Elisha  the  prophet  called  one  of  the  sons  of 
the  prophets,  and  said  unto  him.  Gird  up  thy  loins,  and 
take  this  vial  of  oil  in  thine  hand,  and  go  to  Eamoth- 
gilead.     And  when  thou  comest  thither,  look  out  there 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  139^ 

Jehu  the  son  of  Jehoshaphat  the  son  of  Nimshi,  and  go  in, 
and  make  him  arise  up  from  among  his  brethren,  and 
carry  him  to  an  inner  chamber.  Then  take  the  vial  of 
oil,  and  pour  it  on  his  head,  and  say.  Thus  saith  Yahweh, 
I  have  anointed  thee  king  over  Israel.  Then  open  the  door, 
and  flee,  and  tarry  not.  So  the  young  man,  even  the  young 
man  the  prophet,  went  to  Eamoth-gilead.  And  when  he 
came,  behold,  the  captains  of  the  army  were  sitting;  and 
he  said,  I  have  an  errand  to  thee,  O  captain.  And  Jehu 
said.  Unto  which  of  all  us?  And  he  said.  To  thee,  O 
captain.  And  he  arose,  and  went  into  the  house ;  and  he 
poured  the  oil  on  his  head,  and  said  unto  him.  Thus  saith 
Yahweh,  the  god  of  Israel,  I  have  anointed  thee  king  over 
the  people  of  Yahweh,  even  over  Israel.  And  thou  shalt 
smite  the  house  of  Ahab,  thy  master,  that  I  may  avenge 
the  blood  of  my  servants  the  prophets,  and  the  blood  of 
all  the  servants  of  Yahweh,  at  the  hand  of  Jezebel.  For 
the  whole  house  of  Ahab  shall  perish ;  and  I  will  cut  off 
from  Ahab  every  man  child,  and  him  that  is  shut  up  and 
him  that  is  left  at  large  in  Israel." 

This  bloody  charge  was  carried  out  to  the  letter. 
Jehu  (or  Yahoo)  killed  Jehoram,  king  of  Israel,  and  Aha- 
ziah,  king  of  Judah,  as  well  as  many  of  the  royal  princes 
of  both  kingdoms;  trod  under  foot  the  dead  body  of 
Jezebel,  the  queen  mother;  and  last  but  not  least,  he  de- 
stroyed all  that  he  could  find  of  the  priests  and  prophets 
of  the  Tyrian  god  (2  Kings  9  and  10).  The  revolution  of 
which  Jehu  was  the  champion  in  the  northern  kingdom 
was  matched  a  few  years  later  by  a  similar  course  o^ 
events  in  the  southern  kingdom,  whereby  the  boy  king 
Jehoash  came  to  the  throne,  and  Mattan,  the  priest  of  the 
Tyrian  god,  was  killed  (2  Kings  11).  But  for  the  pres- 
ent, Judah  may  be  neglected.  The  northern  kingdom, 
while  it  lasted,  embracing  as  it  did  by  far  the  larger  part 
of  YahAveh's  people,  was  the  principal  representative  of 
the  life  of  Israel. 

Thus  we  behold  the  first  great  triumph  of  the  new  the- 
ology in  the  official  repudiation  of  the  service  of  foreign 


140  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

gods.  There  was  evidently  sufficient  public  opinion  to 
support  this  revolution.  But  large  bodies  move  slowly; 
and  the  local  baalim  of  different  cities  and  villages,  hav- 
ing been  derived  from  earlier  generations,  and  not  being 
identified  with  any  general,  or  national,  religious  ideas, 
were  still  worshipped.  Now  that  his  people  had  repudi- 
ated foreign  gods,  Yahweh  would  surely  smile  upon  Is- 
rael !  Surely  he  was  not  jealous  of  the  little  baalim,  who 
had  never  aspired  to  be  national  gods,  and  who  acknow- 
ledged his  imperial  headship  over  Israel!  These  local 
deities,  together  with  the  various  images,  poles,  teraphim, 
high  places,  and  other  physical  machinery  of  religion, 
were  merely  subordinate  features  of  the  popular  faith.  We 
shall  hear  more  about  them  later.  Reforms  always  come 
slowly;  and  one  drastic  change  at  a  time  was  evidently 
all  that  the  sluggish  public  opinion  of  Israel,  with  its 
dark,  underlying  mass  of  primitive  religious  ideas,  was 
capable  of  supporting. 

§  78.  —  An  incident  connected  with  the  revolution 
calls  here  for  special  notice.  In  2  Kings  10  we  learn  that 
when  Jehu  was  in  the  midst  of  his  bloody  work  he  saw 
Jehonadab,  the  son  of  Rechab,  coming  to  meet  him.  "And 
Jehu  saluted  him,"  continues  the  account,  "and  said  to 
him.  Is  thine  heart  right,  as  my  heart  is  with  thy  heart? 
And  Jehonadab  answered,  It  is.  If  it  be,"  continued 
Jehu,  "give  me  thine  hand.  And  he  gave  him  his  hand; 
and  Jehu  took  him  up  to  him  into  the  chariot.  And  Jehu 
said.  Come  with  me,  and  see  my  zeal  for  Yahweh."  We 
should  note  that  the  name  "Jehonadab,"  sometimes  given 
^^Jonadab,"  is  combined  with  that  of  the  Israelite  god,  like 
the  names  of  so  many  persons  that  figure  in  this  age.  It 
is  more  accurately  given  as  "Yahnadab."  The  questions 
here  are.  Why  should  Jehu  be  so  glad  to  have  this  man 
Jehonadab  see  his  "zeal"  for  Yahweh?  And  who  was  Je- 
honadab? 

The  context  gives  us  no  hint  of  an  answer.  The  ab- 
sence of  all  explanation  for  such  a  striking  incident  is 
•of  itself  good  presumptive  evidence  that  the  writers  and 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  141 

editors  of  Kings  took  it  for  granted  that  everybody  in 
Israel  would  know  who  Jehonadab  was,  and  what  he  rep- 
resented. But  turning  to  the  book  of  Jeremiah,  written 
over  two  centuries  after  the  age  of  Jehonadab,  we  find  in 
chapter  35  a  passage  which  throws  light  on  this  earlier 
time: 

"The  word  which  came  unto  Jeremiah  from  Yahweh, 
saying,  Go  unto  the  family  of  the  Rechabites,  and  speak 
unto  them,  and  bring  them  into  the  house  of  Yahweh,  into 
one  of  the  chambers,  and  give  them  wine  to  drink.  Then 
I  took  Jaazaniah  the  son  of  Jeremiah,  the  son  of  Haba- 
ziniah,  and  his  brethren,  and  all  his  sons,  and  the  whole 
family  of  the  Rechabites ; .  and  I  brought  them  into  the 
house  of  Yahweh ;  and  I  set  before  the  sons  of  the  house 
of  the  Rechabites  bowls  full  of  wine,  and  cups,  and  I  said 
unto  them.  Drink  ye  wine.  But  they  said.  We  will  drink 
no  wine,  for  Jonadab  the  son  of  Rechab  our  father  com- 
manded us,  saying,  Ye  shall  drink  no  wine,  neither  ye, 
nor  your  sons,  for  ever ;  neither  shall  ye  build  house,  nor 
sow  seed,  nor  plant  vineyard,  nor  have  any;  but  all  your 
days  ye  shall  dwell  in  tents ;  that  ye  may  live  many  days 
in  the  land  wherein  ye  sojourn.  And  we  have  obeyed  the 
voice  of  Jonadab  the  son  of  Rechab  our  father  in  all  that 
he  charged  us,  to  drink  no  wine  all  our  days,  we,  our 
wives,  our  sons,  nor  our  daughters;  nor  to  build  houses 
for  us  to  dwell  in:  neither  have  we  vineyard,  nor  field, 
nor  seed:  but  we  have  dwelt  in  tents,  and  have  obeyed, 
and  done  according  to  all  that  Jonadab  our  father  com- 
manded us.  But  it  came  to  pass,  when  Nebuchadnezzar 
king  of  Babylon  came  up  into  the  land,  that  we  said. 
Come,  and  let  us  go  up  to  Jerusalem  for  fear  of  the  army 
of  the  Chaldeans,  and  for  fear  of  the  army  of  the  Syrians ; 
so  we  dwell  at  Jerusalem." 

Turning  now  to  a  genealogical  table  in  1  Chronicles 
2,  we  find  in  verse  55  the  following :  "These  are  the  Ken- 
ites  that  came  of  Hammath,  the  father  of  the  house  of 
Rechab." 


142  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

These  passages  taken  together  give  us  grounds  for  the 
following  important  conclusions:  Jehonadab,  or  Jona- 
dab,  was  a  man  of  importance,  a  chief  of  a  "father's 
house.''  That  is,  he  was  not  a  man  of  the  lower  class,  but 
of  the  upper  social  stratum.  This  is  congruous  with  the 
fact  that  Jehu,  a  man  aspiring  to  the  kingship,  was  glad 
to  associate  with  him  publicly.  But  more  significant  than 
this,  Jehonadab,  as  1  Chronicles  2  shows,  was  a  Kenite; 
he  bore  a  Yahweh-name;  and  was  known  as  a  champion 
of  Yahweh.  It  was  from  the  Kenites,  we  remember,  that 
the  Israelites  apparently  derived  their  national  god;  and 
it  is  not  surprising  that  the  Yahweh  tradition  and  wor- 
ship should  be  strong  in  families  of  Kenite  descent.  The 
Kenites  of  the  Sinai  region  lived  the  free,  open  life  of 
shepherds  and  tent  dwellers.  The  Israelites,  before  the 
conquest  of  Canaan,  were  on  precisely  the  same  level  of 
culture.  The  Eechabite  descendants  of  Jehonadab,  who 
came  pouring  into  the  city  of  Jerusalem  for  fear  of  hostile 
armies,  were  also  primitive  country  folk,  dwelling  in 
tents,  avoiding  agriculture,  and  following  doubtless  the  oc- 
cupation of  shepherds  and  cattle  breeders.  Probably  this 
family,  located  on  the  outskirts  of  Canaan,  had  found  a 
market  for  their  products  within  the  conquered  land  from 
the  first.  We  know  that  Israel  was  not  entirely  agricul- 
tural, commercial  and  industrial,  although  these  activi- 
ties became  the  ruling  ones  in  society.  However  far  civi- 
lization has  advanced,  it  has  always  depended  partly  upon 
the  services  of  people  who  follow  the  more  primitive 
modes  of  life.  Jehonadab,  then,  seems  to  have  been  a  chief 
of  an  Israelite-Kenite  family  of  cattle  raisers,  that  lived  in 
the  country  districts  of  Canaanitish  Israel.  Probably  he 
was  a  well-to-do  herdsman  of  the  Abraham  description. 

From  these  general  conclusions  we  deduce  that  the 
founding  of  the  Rechabite  sect  was  merely  the  confirming 
of  the  family  of  Jehonadab  in  their  primitive  habits,  as 
contrasted  with  the  more  civilized  and  settled  life  which 
was  now  the  rule  in  Israel.  The  Rechabites,  in  short,  em- 
l)odied  a  protest  against  the  social  problem  which  always 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  143 

<?omes  with  civilization,  and  which  was  now  pressing  upon 
Israel  and  the  whole  oriental  world.  The  interlacing  of 
the  interests  of  society  is  so  close  and  complex  that  any 
change  inimical  to  the  main  body  of  Israel  could  not  fail 
to  react  adversely  upon  the  fortunes  of  country  folk  — 
by  limiting  the  market  for  their  goods,  at  the  very  least. 
The  reason  behind  the  refusal  of  the  Eechabites  to  drink 
wine  is  obvious.  Wine  implies  agriculture  and  a  settled 
mode  of  life;  and  in  making  their  protest  against  civili- 
-zation,  these  tent  dwellers  and  shepherds  looked  upon 
wine  as  a  symbol  of  the  life  they  more  and  more  abhorred, 
from  which  were  issuing  the  economic  influences  hurtful 
to  their  welfare.  Jehu,  the  aspirant  to  the  throne,  was 
glad  to  have  Jehonadab  see  his  "zeaF'  for  Yahweh  because 
Jehonadab  was  a  valiant  Yahweh  man  himself,  and  prom- 
inent among  the  discontented  party  which  supported  the 
revolution. 

It  cannot  be  too  many  times  emphasized  that  ancient 
politics  and  religion  were  united;  and  that  in  studying 
events  like  these  we  are  examining  ordinary,  secular 
events  under  the  guise  of  religion. 

§  79. —  Another  important  fact  calls  for  notice  in 
connection  with  our  survey  of  the  first  great  age  of  the  new 
theology.  With  a  single  exception,  no  king  in  Israel  be- 
fore the  time  of  the  prophet  Elijah  had  borne  a  name  com- 
pounded with  that  of  the  god  of  Israel.  Thus,  we  have 
Saul,  David,  and  Solomon  over  the  united  kingdom ;  and 
these  bear  no  Yahweh-names.  After  the  division,  we  find 
Rehoboam,  Abijam,  and  Asa  over  the  southern  kingdom; 
and  Jeroboam,  Nadab,  Baasha,  Elah,  Omri,  and  Ahab 
over  the  northern.  Among  these  names  we  find  only  one 
—  Abijam,  or  Abijah  —  that  might  indicate  an  increasing 
public  recognition  of  the  claims  of  Yahweh;  and  this,  by 
the  way,  occurs  in  Judah,  where  the  Kenites  had  been 
partly  absorbed.  But  in  and  after  the  age  of  Elijah  a 
very  impressive  change  takes  place  in  this  respect.  The 
heads  of  both  kingdoms,  as  a  rule,  now  bear  names  com- 
pounded with  that  of  Yahweh.    Thus :  Ahaziah,  or  Ahaz- 


144  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

yah;  Jehosaphat,  or  Yah-saphat;  Jehoram,  or  Yah-ram^ 
Joasli,  or  Yah-ash;  Jehu,  or  Yah-oo;  Jotham,  or  Yah- 
tham;  Amaziah,  or  Amaz-yah;  Uzziah,  or  Uz-yah;  Zech- 
ariah,  or  Zechar-yah ;  Hezekiah,  or  Hezek-yah ;  Pekahiah^ 
or  Peka-yah;  Jeconiah,  or  Jecon-yah;  Zedekiah,  or  Ze- 
dek-yah.  This  very  strikingly  indicates  a  growing  public^ 
or  formal,  recognition  of  Yahweh,  god  of  the  Israelites;, 
and  is  in  line  with  the  general  movement  now  under  con- 
sideration. 

§  80.  —  Four  significant  facts,  then,  distinguish  the 
period  which  we  have  called  "the  first  age  of  the  new  the- 
ology.'' 

First :  The  rise  of  the  new  theology  itself  in  the  per- 
son of  Elijah  the  prophet. 

Second:  The  bloody  politico-religious  revolutions 
in  both  kingdoms,  whereby  foreign  deities  and  priests,  and 
the  kings  who  affiliated  with  them,  were  cast  out,  and  Yah- 
weh was  recognized  as  the  one  general  god  whom  Canaan- 
itish  Israel  might  legitimately  worship. 

Third:  The  founding  of  the  primitive  sect  of  the 
Rechabites  as  a  protest  against  the  evils  of  civilization. 

Fourth:  The  practice  of  compounding  the  name  of 
Yahweh  with  the  names  of  the  monarchs  of  both  king- 
doms, which  begins  in  this  age. 

§  81.  —  In  studying  the  decline  of  Israel,  we  must 
bear  constantly  in  mind  the  fact  that  Canaan  had  been  set- 
tled and  largely  civilized  long  before  the  Israelite  con- 
quest. Trade  centered  in  the  Canaanite  cities.  Agricul- 
ture and  stock  raising  occupied  the  Canaanite  villagers 
and  country  folk. 

We  have  seen  that  when  the  people  of  Yahweh  at- 
tacked the  land  of  Canaan,  they  settled  in  the  agricultural 
districts,  being  unable  to  subdue  the  towns.  The  princi- 
pal method  by  which  the  Israelite  upper  class  acquired  its 
country  estates  was  doubtless  the  extermination,  or  sub- 
jugation of  the  Canaanite  rustic  aristocracy.  Whether  or 
not  all  the  arable  soil  of  Canaan  had  been  brought  under 
cultivation  by  the  time  of  the  Conquest,  we  do  not  know. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  145 

Perhaps  it  had  not.  In  any  event,  whatever  the  historical 
circumstances  may  have  been,  the  period  of  the  Judges 
saw  the  establishment  of  an  Israelite  rustic  aristocracy, 
superimposed  upon  a  lower  class  partly  of  Israelite,  and 
partly  of  Canaanite,  extraction;  and  while  some  of  the 
estates  of  this  aristocracy  may  have  been  carved  out  of 
hitherto  uncultivated  land,  perhaps  the  majority  of  them 
were  the  spoil  of  war. 

The  settling  down  of  the  Israelites  to  a  peaceful  life, 
and  the  community  of  language  between  them  and  the 
Canaanites,  paved  the  way  for  the  union  of  the  older  and 
the  newer  inhabitants.  The  process  of  union,  as  we  have 
seen,  was  hastened  by  the  attacks  of  enemies  from  out- 
side  the  country.  In  the  long  run  the  Israelite  rustic  aris- 
tocracy and  the  Canaanite  city  aristocracy  were  alike  in- 
terested in  opposing  the  foreign  foe  and  in  maintaining 
peace.  The  diverse  population  was  rallied  against  its 
common  enemies,  not  in  the  name  of  any  one  of  the  local 
Canaanite  baalim,  but  in  the  name  of  Yahweh.  The  new 
nation  that  resulted  became  Israelite  in  name,  through 
its  acknowledgment  of  Yahweh,  and  partly  Israelite  in 
blood  through  the  continued  intermingling  of  the  older 
and  newer  inhabitants.  The  most  formal  aspect  of  this 
fusion  is  to  be  found  in  the  marriages  between  the  Israel- 
ite rustic  aristocracy  and  the  Canaanite  upper  class  of  the 
towns  and  cities.  As  previously  observed,  this  operated 
to  shift  the  balance  of  power  from  the  country,  where  it 
lay  in  the  early  days  of  Saul,  to  the  towns  and  cities, 
which  it  probably  reached  in  the  latter  days  of  David,  and, 
more  fully,  in  the  reign  of  Solomon. 

Upon  the  accession  of  Kehoboam,  the  son  of  Solomon, 
the  kingdom  divided  on  an  economic  question  whose  de- 
tails, if  we  could  recover  them,  would  probably  show  a 
foreshadowing  of  the  later  troubles.  After  the  division 
we  enter  an  age  of  decline,  wherein  the  social  problem  of 
civilization  begins  to  press  for  solution  —  the  age  that 


10 


146  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

saw  the  dramatic  rise  of  the  new  theology,  and  culminated 
in  the  bloody  politico-religious  revolution. 

§  82.  —  In  the  decades  following  the  accession  of  the 
bloody  Jehu  the  troubles  of  Israel  continued  to  develop. 
About  100  years  after  that  event  (i.  e.,  at  about  b.  c.  740) 
we  are  in  the  midst  of  another  interesting  period  in  the 
history  of  Israel.  The  earlier  parts  of  the  books  of 
Amos,  Hosea,  Micah  and  Isaiah  were  written  in  this 
later  period.  In  these  books  we  find  that  the  prob- 
lem whose  beginnings  have  been  scantily  indicated 
above  has  reached  the  acute  stage,  and  is  fast 
assuming  that  chronic  form  which  has  been  char- 
acteristic of  oriental  countries  for  many  hundreds  of 
years.  In  the  period  at  which  we  have  now  arrived,  in- 
deed, the  entire  oriental  world  was  facing  a  problem  whose 
gravity  can  hardly  be  overestimated.  Failure  to  solve  it 
entailed  social  decay  and  exposed  the  earliest  great  his- 
toric civilization  to  that  long  series  of  successful  assaults 
from  without  which  has  issued,  for  the  time  being,  in  the 
triumph  of  Mohammedanism  and  the  Turk.  Failure  to 
solve  the  same  problem  at  the  critical  period  likewise 
brought  internal  decay  upon  Greece  and  Rome,  and  laid 
open  their  civilization  to  the  attacks  of  barbarians  whom 
they  would  have  been  able  to  resist  if  their  social  organ- 
ism had  been  more  healthy.  Modern  society  also  faces 
the  old  problem,  albeit  under  new  forms;  and  failure  to 
solve  it  can  have  no  other  issue  than  of  old.  The  ultimate 
practical  problem  of  every  society  is  to  raise  good  men  — 
moral,  hopeful,  healthy  men,  with  an  assured  economic 
welfare;  and  if  this  result  is  not  reached  the  wheels  of 
progress  are  inexorably  reversed. 

§  83.  —  The  great  evolutionary  process  that  we  are  ex- 
amining begins  in  the  anarchy  of  animality,  and  ever 
tends  to  work  out  the  development  of  a  social  system,  or 
collectivism.  It  does  this,  however,  unconsciously.  The 
organic  and  collectivistic  nature  of  society  is  either  not  re- 
alized, or  is  but  slowly  comprehended  by  men.  Social  pro- 
gress accumulates  an  ever  increasing  mass  of  material  and 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  147 

spiritual  capital,  principally  through  cleavage.  The  sig- 
nificance of  the  social  system  at  any  given  moment  is  due, 
not  mostly  to  the  individuals  who  compose  the  system  at 
that  given  moment,  but  mostly  to  all  that  the  past  has 
done  for  the  present.  The  resources  of  society  are  public, 
or  communal,  in  their  nature.  They  do  not  derive  their 
significance  from  the  individuals  composing  the  society  at 
the  time.  Both  in  respect  of  its  good  and  of  its  evil, 
society  is  more  properly  described  as  a  collectivism  than 
as  an  individualism. 

But  if  society  is  a  collectivism,  it  is,  nevertheless,  as 
observed  in  the  preceding  chapter,  a  collectivism  develop- 
ing under  the  forms  of  individualism.  Although  the  re- 
sources of  society  are  public,  or  communal,  in  their  na- 
ture arid  origin,  they  are  individual,  or  private,  in  their 
ownership  and  control.  All  the  commonplace,  working 
ideas  of  men  are  adjusted  primarily  upon  the  individual- 
istic basis.  Human  society  is  primarily  and  mostly  re- 
garded by  its  members  as  a  mere  crowd,  or  mob.  It  is 
not  thought  of  as  a  growing  organism.  This  paradoxical 
attitude,  however,  is  entirely  natural.  Human  society 
develops  out  of  a  prior  anarchy,  and  is  composed  of  per- 
sons who  have  grown  up  from  the  crude  selfishness  of  in- 
fancy, and  who  live  self-centered  lives.  Looking  at  the 
social  process  objectively,  through  the  lenses  of  science, 
its  organic  and  coUectivistic  nature  and  tendencies  are 
plainly  visible;  but  looking  at  it  subjectively,  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  actors  in  the  process,  the  whole  scene 
is  changed ;  and  herein  is  the  paradox.  To  the  individual, 
the  world  is  a  vast  open  space  occupied  by  himself  and 
other  individuals.  He  is  one  of  a  crowd,  or  mob,  of  peo- 
ple who  are  engaged  in  various  pursuits.  His  first  ten- 
dency is  to  take  things  as  he  finds  them.  In  order  that 
men  shall  exist  in  society,  and  engage  in  their  various  pur- 
suits, it  is  necessary  to  have  a  common  standpoint  from 
which  to  think  and  talk  about  affairs.  This  common 
standpoint,  which  everybody  primarily  assumes,  is  the  in- 
dividualistic   standpoint.      The    common    ground    upon 


148  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

which  men  primarily  meet  in  society  is  the  ground  of 
individualism. 

Applying  these  considerations  to  the  subject  of  cleav- 
age, the  first  thing  to  be  observed  is,  that  the  social,  or 
public,  mind  has  been  hitherto  unconscious  of  cleavage  as 
here  expounded.  Public  opinion  has  never  yet  reckoned 
with  it  in  the  sense  that  we  are  here  trying  to  reckon  with 
it.  The  nearest  that  the  common  consciousness  comes  to 
it  is  when  verging  upon  "the  relations  between  the  rich 
and  the  poor.''  There  has  been  more  or  less  vague  talk 
about  "the  grinding  of  the  faces  of  the  poor,"  and  of  "the 
conspiracy  of  the  rich  against  the  poor;"  and  there  has 
been  a  small  section  of  class-conscious  persons  on  both 
sides  of  the  line  of  cleavage.  But  the  vast  subject  of 
class  relations  has  never  been  formulated  as  it  deserves, 
either  in  public  or  private  thought.  There  has  always, 
been  a  strong  tendency  on  the  part  of  all  classes  to  assume 
that  all  men  have  had  an  equal  start;  that  a  man's  posi- 
tion in  life  depends  more  upon  his  personal  exertions  than 
upon  forces  over  which  the  individual  has  no  control; 
that  a  man  is  to  be  judged  by  the  clothes  that  he  wears, 
and  by  the  amount  of  property  at  his  disposal;  that  a 
poor  man  is  not  to  be  honored ;  and  that  a  rich  man  is  to 
be  given  great  personal  credit.  It  is,  of  course,  the  de- 
sire of  practically  everybody  to  be  able  to  control  a  large 
amount  of  wealth.  Life  is  thought  of  under  the  figure  of 
"a  race  for  wealth."  The  goal  is  wealth;  and  all  are  in 
the  race.  According  to  the  figure,  it  follows  that  the  suc- 
cessful ones  in  the  race  must  have  been  able  to  run  more 
swiftly  than  the  unsuccessful  ones.  Those  that  are 
wealthy  are  given  individual  honor,  not  only  by  each 
other,  but  by  the  vast  mass  of  the  unsuccessful  who  have 
never  attained  the  goal.  Wealth  is  practically  identified 
with  merit ;  and  if  a  man  is  not  wealthy,  let  him  say  noth- 
ing, and  serve  those  who  are  wealthy,  that  perchance  he 
may  get  some  of  the  crumbs  that  fall  from  the  rich  man's 
table.  And  all  this  accords  with  the  popular  individual- 
istic philosophy,  which  is  at  most  only  half  true. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  149 

It  is  necessary  to  hold  these  considerations  firmly  in 
mind  when  studying  the  problem  toward  which  our  sur- 
vey is  advancing,  for  they  reveal  the  terms  of  the  profound 
paradox  concealed  in  the  very  heart  of  society,  to  miss 
which  is  ultimate  social  ruin. 

§  84.  —  We  have  learned  that  while  society  is  in  the 
nomadic  stage  of  development,  cleavage  rests  upon  slav- 
ery. When  society  settles  down  permanently  upon  the  soil, 
however,  the  earlier  form  of  cleavage  is  associated  with, 
and  at  length  displaced  by,  a  later  form  of  it.  The  free, 
upper  class  claims  individual  property  in  the  soil,  and 
becomes  a  landed  class.  At  first  the  beneficence  of  this 
arrangement  manifestly  exceeds  the  evils  that  flow  from 
it.  While  population  is  scanty,  and  while  unclaimed  land 
is  available,  social  progress  goes  forward  without  serious 
check.  But  at  length  social  cleavage  as  based  on  private 
land  monopoly  begins  to  develop  more  evil  than  good. 

Along  with  the  growth  of  population  the  demand  for 
land  becomes  greater.  This  causes  land  to  rise  in  value. 
As  capital  accumulates,  increasing  the  sum  of  industrial 
facilities,  it  becomes  more  and  more  profitable  to  engage 
in  enterprises  of  all  kinds  in  city  and  country;  and  this, 
too,  forces  up  the  value  of  land.  It  is  realized  that  land 
is  the  foundation  of  all  things;  and  at  length  all  the 
available  soil,  used  and  unused,  comes  into  the  grasp  of 
private  rights. 

Thus  the  progress  of  every  settled  society  leads  to  the 
enclosing  of  more  and  more  land,  not  only  for  immediate 
use,  but  also  for  speculation.  All  the  land  within  a  coun- 
try becomes  the  absolute  monopoly  of  a  class.  There  is 
no  escape  from  this  proposition.  The  entire  body  of  land- 
owners obviously  composes  a  monopolistic  upper  class  as 
against  all  persons  living  or  to  be  born.  The  members  of 
this  class  may,  indeed,  give  or  sell  some  or  all  of  their  mo^ 
nopoly  privileges  to  other  persons.  But  the  transfer  of  a 
monopoly  by  gift,  sale,  or  bequest,  does  not  change  its 
nature.  The  monopolists  may  come  and  go;  but  the  mo- 
nopoly itself  remains.  And  it  is  land  monopoly  that  grad- 


150  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ually  replaces  human  slavery  as  the  determining  factor  in 
social  cleavage.  The  ancient  civilizations,  however,  did 
not  abolish  the  institution  of  property  in  men,  leaving 
that  for  modern  society  to  do. 

§  85.  —  The  tendency  of  land  monopoly,  when  it  i» 
completely  established,  is  toward  the  depression  of  the 
lower  class  to  the  lowest  point  at  which  that  class  can 
exist  from  day  to  day  on  a  hand-to-mouth  basis,  and  to 
raise  the  upper  class  into  correspondingly  greater  afflu- 
ence. The  upper  class  holds  the  key  to  the  source  of  all 
supply.  The  lower  class,  having  only  its  labor  power  to 
depend  upon,  must  apply  to  the  masters  of  the  economic 
situation  for  opportunities  'to  exert  that  labor  power.  The 
slave,  as  a  rule,  is  permitted  to  reserve  out  of  his  labor 
products  enough  to  support  life  in  fair  comfort.  The  slave 
is  his  master's  property;  and,  providing  the  supply  of 
slaves  be  not  excessive  and  their  price  low,  it  is  plainly  the 
interest  of  slaveowners  to  keep  their  human  property  in 
good  physical  condition.  But  if  slavery  be  abolished  while 
the  upper  class  monopolize  the  land,  or  if  there  be  a  per- 
sonally free  element  in  the  lower  class,  the  so-called  "free'' 
laborer  must,  as  a  rule,  be  content  with  a  wage  represent- 
ing, in  the  long  run,  about  enough  to  support  himself  and 
family  on  a  hand-to-mouth  basis.  The  increase  of  popu- 
lation, constantly  throwing  new  "hands"  into  the  labor 
world  in  search  of  work,  tends  to  hold  wages  at  the  hand- 
to-mouth  level,  or  to  depress  them  to  that  level  if,  for  any 
reason,  they  have  been  above  it.  If  the  free  laborer  de- 
mand a  higher  wage  than  he  has  been  receiving,  other 
men  stand  ready  to  work  for  the  price  he  has  been  getting. 
Though  the  lower  class  be  free  in  name  and  in  form, 
nevertheless  it  has  no  resources  beyond  its  labor  power; 
and  its  members  must  compete  with  each  other  for  em- 
ployment in  the  service  of  those  who  own  the  natural 
source  of  all  supply. 

Thus  extreme  wealth  and  extreme  poverty  appear  to- 
gether, the  cause  of  the  one  being  also  the  cause  of  the 
other.     The  vast  increase  of  wealth  in  the  hands  of  the 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  151 

upper  class  results  in  the  diversion  of  appropriated  labor 
products  from  capital  to  luxury,  while  the  vast  increase 
of  dependence  in  the  lower  class  generates  all  the  evils 
that  accompany  poverty.  The  lower  class  grows  hope- 
less. Kobbery  and  crimes  against  the  person  increase.. 
Beggary  grows  apace.  Poor  girls  and  women,  lacking  the 
necessities  produced  by  the  labor  of  their  own  class,  sell 
themselves  to  men  who  have  grown  wealthy  on  lower- 
class  labor,  and  who  have  more  than  they  can  use  pro- 
perly. 

§  ^%.  —  This  problem  is  complicated,  but  not  essen- 
tially altered,  by  the  fact  of  monopoly  concentration,  al- 
ready referred  to  when  discussing  the  preaching  of  Eli- 
jah, the  Ahab-Naboth  incident,  and  the  vine-and-fig-tree 
tradition.  It  is  now  time  to  look  at  this  important  fact 
more  closely. 

If  a  country  be  newly  settled  by  foreigners,  as  Amer- 
ica was  after  its  discovery  by  Columbus,  or  if  a  countr;^ 
be  subjugated,  as  Canaan  was  by  the  Israelites,  there  are 
at  first  opportunities  not  only  for  the  formation  of  large 
landed  estates,  but  of  small  ones  as  well.  When  America 
was  first  settled  by  Europeans,  not  only  did  wealthy  per- 
sons from  the  nobility  and  the  commercial  upper  class  in 
the  old  countries  take  up  large  tracts  of  land,  but  the 
immense  empire  of  good,  unused  soil  provided  homes  for 
many  free  men  of  little  or  no  wealth.  All  the  good  soil 
of  America  has  at  length  come  into  the  grasp  of  private 
rights.  To  some  extent,  of  course,  it  has  been  taken  up 
for  actual,  immediate  use;  but  more  for  speculation  than 
for  use.  The  vast  empire  of  land  over  which  today  flies 
the  flag  of  the  United  States  contains  natural  resources 
great  enough  to  support  several  times  its  present  popula- 
tion; but  these  natural  resources  are  monopolized  — 
"held  for  a  rise;"  and  the  pressure  of  increasing  popula- 
tion is  forcing  Congress  to  apply  the  superficial  remedy 
of  irrigating  the  arid  lands  of  the  west  for  the  benefit  of 
the  homeseekers.  When  the  Israelite  tribes  left  the  bar- 
baric, wandering  life  of  the  desert,  and  conquered  part  of 


152  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  land  of  Canaan,  there  were  opportunities  not  only  for 
the  leaders  and  larger  slaveowners  to  take  up  large  landed 
estates,  but  there  were  also  homestead  openings  for  humb- 
ler freemen.  These  men  were  the  relatives  of  the  clan 
leaders.  They  were  men  who  had  few  slaves  or  none.  If 
these  humbler  freemen  possessed  a  few  slaves,  they 
figured  as  a  small  aristocracy.  If  they  had  none,  depend- 
ing upon  themselves  and  perhaps  their  sons,  or  upon  hired 
labor,  they  figured  as  a  peasant  proprietai:y.  In  any  case, 
whether  the  smaller  freemen  had  slaves  or  not,  we  should 
know  that  the  settlement  of  Canaan  by  the  Israelites, 
like  the  settlement  of  America  by  Europeans,  provided  at 
the  start  for  the  admission  of  poor  as  well  as  rich  to  the 
monopoly  of  the  land. 

Coming  now  to  the  present  point,  we  observe  that  in 
any  social  system  wherein  private  property  in  the  soil 
exists,  the  lesser  landholders,  even  if  they  form  at  first 
an  actual  majority  of  the  free  class,  tend  to  be  depressed 
by  economic  forces  into  the  lower  dependent  class.  This 
contraction  of  the  landowning  class,  whereby  the  many 
small  estates  are  added  to  the  larger  holdings,  complicates 
the  social  problem,  but  does  not  change  its  essential  na- 
ture as  generally  set  forth  above.  Concentration  went 
forward  in  Israel  and  oriental  society  in  general,  just  as 
it  is  going  forward  in  America  today.  It  is  impossible 
to  indicate  the  point  in  time  at  which  the  effects  of 
upper-class  contraction  began  to  be  visible.  We  run  no 
risk,  however,  in  concluding  that  its  beginnings  were 
noticeable  at  the  time  of  the  division  of  the  kingdom; 
and  that  in  the  age  of  Elijali  it  had  become  serious. 
With  reference  to  the  still  later  period  whereon  our  at- 
tention is  now  gradually  focussing,  Professor  Paton 
writes :  "While  the  nobles  flourished  the  poor  grew  stead- 
ily poorer.  The  peasant  proprietors  were  crowded  out, 
and  all  the  land  came  into  the  hands  of  a  few  great  nobles. 
The  free-born  Israelites  sank  to  the  position  of  serfs.  Op- 
pression and  injustice  flourished"   (54). 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  153 

§  87.  —  The  forces  working  toward  the  concentration 
of  landed  estates  in  Canaanitish  Israel  were  manj.  A 
suggestion  from  a  late  period,  but  valid  as  an  illustration 
at  any  time,  is  found  in  the  fifth  chapter  of  Nehemiah: 

"Some  also  there  were  that  said.  We  are  mortgaging 
our  fields  and  our  vineyards  and  our  houses:  Let  us  get 
corn  because  of  the  dearth.  There  were  also  that  said, 
We  have  borrowed  money  for  the  king's  tribute  upon  our 
fields  and  our  vineyards.  Yet  now  our  flesh  is  as  the 
flesh  of  our  brethren,  our  children  as  their  children :  and, 
lo,  we  bring  into  bondage  our  sons  and  our  daughters  to 
be  slaves,  and  some  of  our  daughters  are  brought  into 
bondage  already;  neither  is  it  in  our  power  to  help  it; 
for  other  men  have  our  fields  and  our  vineyards." 

Eeference  to  the  "king's  tribute"  in  the  passage  re- 
produced above  leads  to  a  subject  of  great  importance  in 
relation  to  the  concentration  of  land  monopoly.  Taxes 
were  poorly  adjusted  in  ancient  oriental  society,  as  they 
were  in  ancient  Greece  and  Kome,  and  as  they  are  in 
modern  society.  Taxation  relates  to  the  payments  by 
members  of  a  social  group  in  support  of  common  policies 
necessary  to  the  life  and  welfare  of  the  group.  The  in 
stitution,  or  agency,  which  carries  out  these  common 
policies  we  call  "government;"  and  the  concerns  and 
forms  of  government  we  call  "politics."  Thus  "politics" 
is  merely  an  abstract  term  standing  for  one  side,  or  phase, 
of  the  complex  life  of  human  society. 

In  the  earlier  sections  of  this  chapter  we  have  tried 
to  show  that  government,  like  many  other  institutions, 
necessarily  organizes  itself  upon  the  lines  of  cleavage  at 
a  very  early  period.  As  soon  as  social  bodies  of  any  size 
have  been  formed,  government  rests  naturally  with  the 
freemen,  not  with  the  slaves;  and  out  of  the  totality  of 
freemen,  the  wealthier  ones  acquire  control  of  the  govern- 
ment. The  great  type  of  the  ancient  politician  is  Abra- 
ham, whether  lie  be  taken  as  an  actual  person  or  not. 
Such. a  man,  however,  is  merely  "the  first  among  peers." 
The  other  freemen  of  the  tribe,  relatives  of  Abraham  by 


154  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

blood  or  adoption,  consult  with  him  in  regard  to  the 
proper  courses  to  be  followed  in  common  for  the  benefit 
of  the  whole  group. 

In  a  primitive  society  of  this  kind,  it  is  difficult  to 
say  where  the  subject  of  taxation  begins  or  ends.  Taxa- 
tion, like  everything  else,  is  under  the  law  of  evolution. 
It  passes  from  the  indefinite  to  the  definite;  and  no  hu- 
man science  can  trace  the  details  of  its  history.  The  most 
that  can  be  done  is  to  indicate  the  bolder  tendencies  and 
outlines.  Let  us  suppose  that  such  a  tribe,  having  camped 
for  a  time  upon  a  certain  territory,  finds  its  food  supply 
growing  short,  and  proposes  to  acquire  the  pasture  lands 
and  hunting  grounds  of  some  other  tribe.  After  the  gov- 
erning council  has  decided  what  to  do,  the  tribal  chief 
summons  the  freemen  to  the  common  enterprise.  Each 
freeman  is  naturally  assessed  for  the  expenses  of  the 
campaign  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  his  slaves,  cat- 
tle and  other  property.  Each  freeman  thinks  of  himself 
and  his  brother  freemen  as  "paying"  slaves,  cattle,  and 
goods  toward  tjie  expenses  of  the  campaign;  and,  what 
is  more,  since  public  opinion  is  primarily  formed  by  the 
upper  class  of  legal  men,  the  same  view  is  taken  by  the 
lower  class  also.  Likewise,  people  who  in  modern  times 
are  actually  bearing  the  largest  share  of  the  burdens  of 
government,  regard  themselves,  and  are  thought  of  by 
others,  as  non-taxpayers;  while  a  relatively  small  class 
of  men  who  formally  and  legally  hand  in  the  taxes  to  the 
government  officials  are  thought  of  by  all  as  the  only  real 
"payers.''  But  the  real  payers,  alike  in  modern  society 
and  in  the  nomadic  tribe,  are  not  necessarily  identical 
with  the  legal  payers;  and  the  superficial  view  com- 
monly taken  breeds  trouble  in  the  discussion  of  the  later 
problems  of  governmental  support. 

When  tribes  left  the  nomadic  life,  and  settled  per- 
manently on  the  soil,  they  naturally  carried  over  with 
them  the  principle  of  taxation  according  to  ability  to  pay. 
This  is  the  method  which  first  and  most  naturally  occurs 
to  us  when  discussing  the  subject  of  governmental  sup- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  156> 

port;  and,  on  the  whole,  if  correctly  and  consistently  ap- 
plied, it  is  the  best  rule  of  taxation. 

But  before  it  can  be  carried  to  its  logical  application 
in  settled  society,  and  while  it  is  applied  only  in  its  earlier 
and  cruder  form,  this  principle  works  irresistibly  toward 
the  concentration  of  landed  estates  and  of  general  wealth. 
The  mass  of  city  property,  real  and  personal,  movable 
and  fixed,  is  inevitably  under-assessed  as  compared  with 
taxable  values  in  the  rural  districts;  and  the  further  the 
progress  of  civilization  advances,  with  its  ever  growing 
preponderance  of  city  life  over  country  life,  the  further 
does  the  relative  over-assessment  of  rustic  property  go. 
In  the  agricultural  and  stock-raising  districts  the  as- 
sessor can  estimate  very  closely  the  value  of  all  property. 
The  items  of  rustic  property  are  matters  of  common  gos- 
sip; and  the  farmer  himself,  when  questioned  by  the 
assessor,  cannot  much  understate  the  values  in  his  posses- 
sion without  risk  of  detection.  On  the  other  hand,  the  ap- 
praiser cannot  accurately  estimate  the  total  values  of  the 
different  kinds  and  amounts  of  real  and  personal  property 
in  the  cities.  A  large  part  of  city  wealth  consists  of  trade 
stocks  in  a  state  of  constant  flux;  much  city  wealth  can 
be  effectually  hidden  from  the  tax  collector;  and  often 
the  owners  of  city  property  cannot  themselves  accurately 
estimate  the  values  in  their  possession,  or  that  have 
passed  through  their  hands  in  the  course  of  a  year.  The 
larger  the  cities  grow,  and  the  wealthier  they  become,  the 
more  difficult  is  it  to  reach  their  property  by  the  crude  ap- 
plication of  the  ability-to-pay  principle.  Thus,  in  all  set- 
tled societies  there  is  an  over-assessment  of  rural  pro- 
perty, and  an  underassessment  of  city  property;  while 
the  smaller  property  holders  everywhere,  in  city  and  coun- 
try alike,  pay  more  in  proportion  than  do  the  larger 
holders. 

In  Canaanitish  Israel  the  burdens  of  the  frequent 
and  often  protracted  wars  obviously  fell  more  heavily 
in  proportion  upon  the  small  than  upon  the  large  pro- 
prietors.    The  estates  of  the  smaller  landowners  were 


156  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

necessarily  more  neglected  during  a  war  than  the  better 
served  and  more  organized  estates  of  the  larger  propri- 
etors and  slaveowners;  while  the  town  aristocracy  suf- 
fered least  of  all.  We  must  bear  prominently  in  mind  in 
this  connection  that  the  Canaanite  upper  class  of  the 
towns  and  cities  held  its  own  at  the  time  of  the  Conquest ; 
and  that  these  busy  centers  of  population  were  wealthy 
before  the  appearance  of  the  tribes  of  Israel.  As  soon  as 
the  Israelites  had  established  themselves  in  the  agricul- 
tural districts,  and  united  politically  with  the  Canaanite 
towns  to  form  the  nation  of  Canaanitish  Israel,  the  condi- 
tions here  being  set  forth  began  to  prevail.  After  a  war 
the  small  aristocrats  and  the  peasant  proprietors  would 
find  their  estates  in  decay.  In  order  to  re-stock  their 
farms  and  pay  their  taxes,  they  would  be  forced  to  bor- 
row from  underassessed  and  richer  men  in  country  and 
city,  as  we  saw  the  farmers  doing  in  the  passage  quoted 
from  Nehemiah.  Thereafter,  the  small  aristocrats  would 
have  to  make  their  property  yield  not  only  all  their  living 
expenses  and  taxes,  but  interest  on  the  loan,  and  finally 
the  repayment  of  the  loan  itself.  In  time,  they  or  their 
heirs,  working  at  a  continuous  and  increasing  disadvan- 
tage, would  fall  under  these  burdens;  and  the  richer 
neighbor,  or  the  money  lender  from  the  city,  would  claim 
the  property.  As  the  passage  in  Nehemiah  also  suggests, 
drouth  and  failure  of  crops,  like  war,  would  force  the 
small  owner  to  borrow  from  the  wealthier,  and  with  a  like 
result. 

In  the  light  of  these  universal  tendencies,  is  it  strange 
'that  the  question  over  which  Canaanitish  Israel  was  di- 
vided at  the  end  of  its  first  and  only  century  of  national 
existence  was  a  question  of  taxation?  David  was  repro- 
Tjated  by  later  tradition  for  taking  a  census  of  Israel, 
whereof  an  object,  among  others,  was  probably  to  ascer- 
tain the  amount  of  taxable  property  in  the  whole  country. 
'Solomon,  his  son,  divided  the  land  into  taxation  districts 
regardless  of  tribal  affiliations.  At  the  death  of  Solomon, 
who  was  a  city  man  in  contrast  with  Saul,  the  first  king, 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  157- 

the  balance  of  economic  power  in  the  mixed  population 
had  probably  shifted  from  country  to  city  ;  and  the  writ- 
ings of  the  literary  prophets  exhibit  the  increasing  eco- 
nomic domination  of  the  rural  districts  by  the  city  pluto- 
crats. Is  it  strange  that  there  has  always  been  more  or 
less  feeling  between  the  rural  and  the  urban  sections  of 
society?  And  is  it  strange  that  a  formal  protest  was  made 
by  Jehonadab  and  the  Kechabites  on  behalf  of  the  original 
primitive  life,  against  the  evils  that  were  somehow  con- 
nected with  progress  and  civilization,  commerce  and 
cities? 

§  88.  —  Thus  we  note  the  conditions  operating  to  re- 
duce the  comparative  size  and  increase  the  economic  re- 
sources of  the  upper  class,  while,  on  the  contrary,  increas- 
ing the  comparative  size  and  cutting  down  the  economic 
resources  of  the  lower  class. 

Undoubtedly,  as  we  have  already  explained,  the  lower 
class  has  derived  untold  benefits  through  the  advance  of 
each  great  civilization  which  has  been  thus  far  projected 
above  the  levels  of  barbarism,  savagery,  and  animality. 
It  must  be  frankly  acknowledged,  however,  that  this  par- 
ticipation in  progress  has  not  been  the  result  of  any  so- 
cial intelligence.  By  the  operation  of  cosmic  forces,  and 
without  knowledge  of  what  is  working  out  in  their  lives, 
primitive  men  are  carried  up  from  savagery  and  animal- 
ity into  civilization.  But  the  further  the  process  of  social 
development  goes,  the  more  necessary  does  it  become  that 
men  awaken  to  a  realization  of  the  nature  and  laws  of 
society.  They  must  acquire  knowledge  enough  to  perceive 
what  public  measures  to  take,  and  public  spirit  enough 
to  take  those  measures.  The  civilization  that  fails  in  this 
respect  inevitably  goes  backward;  and  the  lower  class, 
as  we  are  learning,  is  the  first  to  suffer. 

In  the  period  at  which  Ave  have  arrived,  oriental  civi- 
lization had  reached  its  great  social  crisis,  and,  ignorant 
of  the  facts  and  laws  of  its  own  social  being,  was  going 
down  to  ruin.  Here  was  a  vast  world  of  humanity  whose 
culture  lies  at  the  base  of  much  of  the  higher  progress; 


158  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

of  later  historic  civilizations.  Here  was  a  social  world 
which  had  accomplished  more,  both  materially  and  intel- 
lectually, than  any  other  section  of  the  human  race  up 
to  that  time.  Yet,  just  at  the  period  when  we  seem  to 
have  the  right  to  expect  oriental  society  to  achieve  a  still 
greater  destiny,  it  falls  into  internal  decay,  and  succumbs 
to  the  attacks  of  barbarians  that  close  in  upon  it  from  all 
sides. 

§  89.  —  When  the  oriental  world  attempted  to  explain 
the  situation  in  which  it  found  itself  in  its  age  of  decline, 
the  social  intelligence  of  the  period,  as  just  observed,  was 
unequal  to  the  task.  Out  of  all  that  great  civilization  — 
out  of  all  that  weltering  sea  of  humanity  —  the  only  voice 
that  has  reached  us  across  the  vista  of  the  centuries  is 
the  voice  of  the  prophets  of  Israel,  proclaiming  the  doc- 
trines of  the  new  theology.  It  would  be  illogical,  how- 
ever, to  suppose  that  Israel  was  the  only  people  among 
whom  expressions  of  dissatisfaction  found  voice,  for,  in 
the  very  nature  of  the  case,  dissatisfaction  must  have  been 
universal.  But  Israel  was  the  only  people  whose  early 
history  supplied  a  basis,  either  in  fact  or  in  tradition, 
for  a  dramatic  interpretation  of  the  social  problem.  The 
prophets  were  moved  by  no  merely  local  tendency.  They 
represented  a  local  involution  of  a  universal  tendency. 

We  have  seen  that  Elijah,  in  the  ninth  century  b.  c, 
was  the  first  great  representative  of  the  new  theology. 
But  probably  the  new  view  did  not  reach  complete  ex- 
pression until  tradition  had  had  more  time  to  work.  In 
the  eighth  century  b.  o.  it  became  at  length  fully  articu- 
late in  such  preachers  as  Amos,  Hosea,  Micah,  and  Isaiah. 
To  the  sociologist  who  investigates  the  writings  of  these 
and  later  prophets  from  the  broad,  scientific  standpoint, 
it  is  plain  that  their  concern  was  primarily  social,  and 
secondarily  theological.  They  were  dealing  with  what, 
in  modern  times  and  modern  terms,  is  commonly  called 
"the"  social  problem.  Their  preaching,  although  neces- 
sarily theological  in  form  (politics  and  religion  being 
united),  was  in  substance  an  attempt  to  explain  and  solve 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  159 

practical,  secular  difficulties  which  the  world  has  now 
learned,  or  is  fast  learning,  to  approach  in  a  wholly  differ- 
ent spirit.  In  this  respect,  indeed,  the  new  theology  was 
directly  in  line  with  what  has  been  shown  to  be  the  prac- 
tical motive  of  all  early  religion.  In  other  words,  the  new 
Israelite  theology,  however  strange  it  may  have  seemed  in 
contrast  with  primitive  theology  in  general,  was  a  new 
species  of  an  old  genus. 

§  90.  —  According  to  the  most  general  form  of  the 
prophetic  doctrine,  the  troubles  that  had  come  upon  Is- 
rael in  Canaan,  both  from  outside  and  inside  the  country, 
were  primarily  due  to  the  fact  that  Israel  had  not  been 
faithful  to  the  contract  with  Yahweh  at  Mount  Sinai.  At 
the  beginning  of  the  national  history,  Yahweh  had 
wrought  great  wonders  for  his  chosen  people,  and  given 
Israel  a  glorious  and  rising  place  in  the  world.  He  was 
obviously  the  maker  of  Israel.  But  Israel  had  perversely 
^^forgotten  his  maker,''  and  "gone  a-whoring  after  other 
gods,  and  after  the  baalim  of  the  Canaanites  whom  Yah- 
weh drave  out  before  the  face  of  Israel."  If  Israel  would 
not  be  faithful  to  Yahweh  in  return  for  all  his  faithful- 
ness, what  wonder  was  it  that  Yahweh  should  turn,  and 
"^^hide  his  face,''  and  bring  trouble  upon  his  chosen  people? 
Let  Israel  cast  away  the  baalim,  and  serve  Yahweh  as 
faithfully  as  he  had  served  his  chosen  people;  then  the 
tide  of  prosperity  would  return;  and  the  course  of  em- 
pire, interrupted  by  the  sins  of  the  people,  would  once 
more  take  its  way  until  Israel  should  inherit  the  world. 

The  revolution  of  Jehu  in  the  northern  kingdom,  and 
of  Jehoash  in  the  southern,  had,  indeed,  banished  the  gods 
of  other  nations;  but  the  baalim  of  the  Canaanites,  "the 
former  inhabitants  of  the  land,"  remained.  Yahweh  him- 
self, having  conquered  Canaan,  was  called  the  great  Baal, 
or  proprietor,  of  the  land  of  Israel.  His  worship  was 
conducted  at  the  "high  places"  all  over  the  country  in 
connection  with  the  service  of  the  local  baalim ;  and  when 
the  same  term,  "baal,"  or  "proprietor,"  was  thus  applied 
at  once  to  Yahweh  and  the  local  gods,  it  became  plain  to 


160  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

zealous  worshippers  of  the  general  god  of  Israel  that  this^ 
practice  was  likely  to  make  the  people  confuse  Yahweh 
with  the  lesser  gods.  Listen  to  the  prophet  Hosea,  in 
a  passage  which  exhibits  the  tendency  of  the  people  ta 
apply  to  Yahweh  the  same  title  as  that  which  they  be- 
stowed upon  the  lesser  gods,  and  also  shows  the  persist- 
ence of  the  worship  of  these  local  deities : 

"And  it  shall  be  at  that  day,  saith  Yahweh,  that  thou 
shalt  call  me  Ishi,  [my  husband],  and  shalt  call  me  no 
more  Baali  [my  proprietor].  For  I  will  take  away  the 
names  of  the  baalim  out  of  her  mouth,  and  they  shall  no 
more  be  remembered  by  their  name^'  (Hosea  2: 16,  17). 

It  is  plain  that  the  prophets  did  not  understand  the 
inner  circumstances  of  the  conquest  and  settlement  of 
Canaan  by  Israel.  Elijah  and  his  successors  lived  in 
times  when  the  glory  of  united  Israel  was  a  thing  of  the 
past.  They  could  not  see,  as  we  today  can,  that  the  con- 
quest was  a  much  smaller  and  more  sordid  affair  than  it 
seemed  in  the  eyes  of  the  later  generations  among  whom 
they  lived.  They  could  not  understand  that  the  estab- 
lishment of  Israel  as  a  national  power  was  largely  due 
to  the  incorporation  of  the  Canaanites  themselves.  Nor 
did  they  perceive  that  the  history  of  Israel  in  Canaan  was 
really  a  continuation  of  the  earlier  history  of  the  country 
under  a  new  name. 

The  prophets,  however,  were  not  critical  historians. 
There  were  no  critical  historians  in  that  age;  and,  more- 
over, the  object  of  the  prophets  was  not  historical.  They 
were  intensely  preoccupied  with  the  practical  difficulties 
of  their  own  times.  They  accepted  the  popular  tradition 
of  Yahw^eh  and  Israel  at  its  face  value;  but  they  got  more 
out  of  the  tradition  than  did  the  less  thoughtful  among 
the  people. 

§  91.  —  Physical  faithfulness  to  the  worship  of  Yah- 
weh as  contrasted  with  other  gods  was  not,  however,  all 
that  the  prophets  demanded.  To  the  prophetic  mind, 
faithfulness  to  Yahweh  meant  a  great  deal  more  than 
mere  mechanical  devotion  to  his  worship.    Israel  had  not 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  161 

only  mixed  the  worship  of  Yahweh  with  the  service  of 
other  gods,  and  thereby  committed  grievous  error;  but 
the  people  had  been  "unrighteous"  and  "unjust''  in  their 
dealings  with  each  other.  It  was  clear  to  the  prophets 
that  the  people  could  not  render  the  fullest  and  most  effi- 
cient service  to  Yahweh  when  they  were  unrighteous  to 
each  other.  Justice  and  righteousness  were  a  part  of  the 
service  of  Yahweh;  and  if  the  people  were  unrighteous^ 
this  was  proof  positive  that  they  did  not  "know  Yahweh.'^ 
If  the  people  did  not  know  Yahweh,  even  while  faithful 
to  his  worship  in  a  ritual,  or  mechanical,  sense,  they 
were  offending  him  as  much  as  by  the  worship  of  other 
gods.  "I  hate,  I  despise  your  feasts,''  are  the  words  that 
the  prophet  Amos  utters  for  Yahweh.  "I  will  take  no  de- 
light in  your  solemn  assemblies.  Yea,  though  ye  offer 
me  your  burnt  offerings  and  meat  offerings,  I  will  not  ac- 
cept them:  neither  will  I  regard  the  peace  offerings  of 
your  fat  beasts.  Take  thou  away  from  me  the  noise  of  thy 
songs;  for  I  will  not  hear  the  melody  of  thy  viols.  But 
let  judgment  roll  down  as  waters,  and  righteousness  as 
an  overflowing  stream"  (Amos  5 :  21  f.).  It  is  plain,  from 
the  works  of  the  literary  prophets  themselves,  that  all  the 
people  regarded  and  worshipped  Yahweh  as  the  great  god 
of  Israel.  There  is  no  doubt  of  this.  But  the  people 
had  mixed  his  worship  with  that  of  other  deities ;  thereby 
showing  unfaithfulness  to  a  powerful  god  who  had  chosen 
them  out  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth,  and  shown  a 
singular  faithfulness  to  their  interests.  Although  they 
held  many  feasts  and  solemn  assemblies  in  his  honor; 
although  they  made  many  burnt  offerings,  and  meat  offer- 
ings, and  sacrifices  of  fat  beasts;  although  they  rendered 
songs,  and  played  on  musical  instruments  before  him, 
—  yet  there  was  injustice  in  their  every-day  life.  Unless 
judgment  "ran  down  as  waters,"  and  righteousness  as 
"an  overflowing  stream,"  all  this  mechanical  worship 
counted  for  nothing.  Yahweh  hated  it;  and  would  not 
accept  it. 
11 


162  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

§  92.  —  There  was  nothing  essentially  new  in  this 
prophetic  association  of  ethics  and  religion;  but  the  cir- 
cumstances made  it  seem  new.  To  begin  to  understand 
the  circumstances,  we  must  once  more  consider  the  transi- 
tion stage  in  social  development  wherein  wandering  tribes 
unite  in  settled  nations. 

In  the  nomadic  social  group,  a  certain  species  of 
justice  between  the  tribesmen  is  plainly  a  condition  of 
their  corporate  unity  and  strength.  If  the  clan  brothers 
are  unjust  to  each  other  they  destroy  the  unity  of  the 
group,  and  expose  it  to  the  attacks  of  outsiders.  This 
primitive,  tribal  morality  is  the  legislation  of  immemorial 
custom,  whereof  the  tribal  and  the  clan  chiefs  are  the 
executives.  And  since  the  gods  are  translated  chiefs  and 
heroes,  they  too  represent  the  demand  for  morality.  All 
personal  conduct  which  is  thought  necessary  to  the  com- 
mon welfare  is,  then,  demanded  by  the  gods;  and  in  the 
name  of  the  gods  the  tribal  chief  renders  judgment  be- 
tween man  and  man.  When  the  Israelitish  tribes  ac- 
quired their  god  Yahweh  in  the  wilderness,  there  was 
naturally  associated  with  him  a  conventional,  primitive 
morality.  The  considerations  here  adduced  are  the  induc- 
tive grounds  for  supposing  that  Moses  gave  the  people  a 
rough  code  of  ethics  at  Sinai.  If  the  literature  of  Israel 
affords  deductive  grounds  for  the  same  conclusion  (as 
we  think  it  does )  so  much  the  better  for  the  argument. 

But  when  tribes  hitherto  nomadic  settle  permanently 
upon  the  soil,  and  unite  into  a  nation,  it  is  not  long  be- 
fore the  national  organization  overshadows  and  super- 
sedes the  earlier  tribal  system.  The  altered  social  condi- 
tion of  the  people  makes  it  not  only  unnecessary  but  im- 
possible to  continue  the  tribal  organization  and  life.  At 
length,  all  that  remains  of  the  more  ancient  system  is 
family  political  supremacy  and  family  social  tradition. 
Tribes,  indeed,  may  be  said  to  evaporate  in  sentiment 
when  nations  crystallize  in  politics.  This  profound  social 
transformation  cannot  fail  to  affect  the  ethical  relations 
obtaining  between  men;    and  in  the  case  of  Canaanitish 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  163 

Israel,  the  dramatic  rise  of  the  new  theology  in  the  per- 
sons of  Elijah  and  his  successors,  the  writing  prophets, 
indicates  that  along  with  the  dissolution  of  tribal  bonds 
the  Mosaic,  or  tribal,  ethicalism  had  broken  down. 

The  prophets  based  their  ethicalism  upon  the  Mosaic 
tradition;  but,  practically,  their  demand  for  righteous- 
ness is  to  be  traced  back  directly  into  the  primitive  reli- 
gious consciousness  of  rustic  Israelites  like  the  family  of 
Jehonadab,  and  to  the  example  of  nomadic  tribes  that 
always  hovered  on  the  outskirts  of  the  land  in  limited 
contact  with  the  main  body  of  Israelite  society  in  Canaan. 

It  is  indeed  of  great  importance  to  notice  and  empha- 
size that  the  earlier  preachers  of  the  new  theology  came, 
not  from  the  cities,  but  from  the  rural  districts,  which 
were  bearing  the  heavier  proportional  burdens  of  taxa- 
tion, and  falling  under  the  economic  sway  of  the  cities. 
The  cities  were  wealthy  before  the  Conquest;  and  it  was 
to  the  cities  that  the  titles  to  the  property  of  the  mixed 
population  steadily  gravitated  after  the  rise  of  the  na- 
tional kingdom  of  Canaanitish  Israel.  It  was  against  all 
tendency  to  city  life,  we  are  again  and  again  reminded, 
that  the  zealous  Jehonadab  and  the  Kenite  Kechabites  pro- 
tested in  the  first  great  age  of  the  new  theology.  The  affi- 
nity of  prophetism  with  this  feeling  is  exhibited  in  words 
that  Hosea,  one  of  the  earlier  literary  prophets,  puts  in  the 
mouth  of  Yahweh:  "I  will  yet  again  make  thee  to  dwell 
in  tents"  (Hosea  12:9).  This  declaration  is  the  anti- 
thesis of  a  reproachful  reference  to  the  wealth  of  the  city 
people  as  follows:  "As  for  the  canaanite  [i.  e.,  the 
trader],  the  balances  of  deceit  are  in  his  hand.  He  loveth 
to  defraud.  And  Ephraim  [i.  e.,  northern  Israel]  said, 
Surely  I  am  become  rich.  I  have  found  me  wealth" 
(Hosea  12:7,  8).  In  this  passage  the  term  "canaanite" 
does  not  indicate  the  descendants  of  the  earlier  inhabit- 
ants of  the  land,  as  such.  It  is  applied  to  Israelites  of 
the  cities  as  a  term  synonymous  with  "trader,"  "traf- 
ficker," or  "merchant."  It  was  the  cities  of  Canaan,  we 
remember,  that  the  Israelitish  tribes  could  not  conquer; 


164  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

and  the  later,  commercial  signification  of  the  term 
"canaanite''  is  reminiscent  of  this  fact.  The  new  the- 
ology, then,  took  its  rise  in  the  rural  districts.  The  home 
of  the  great  Elijah  seems  to  have  been  in  the  Gilead 
region,  in  the  hills  east  of  the  River  Jordan,  bordering 
on  the  Arabian  desert,  where  Israelite  society  naturally 
retained  longest  the  rustic  simplicity  of  earlier  days,  and 
where  it  came  into  contact  with  nomadic  folk  (1  Kings 
17 : 1).*  Elijah's  disciple  and  continuator,  Elisha  ben  Sha- 
phat,  was  called  by  him  from  the  plow  handles  (1  Kings 
19 :  19  f.).  According  to  the  text,  Elisha  was  plowing 
with  twelve  yoke  of  oxen  before  him,  and  he  himself  with 
the  twelfth.  Leaving  his  work  he  asked  permission  of 
Elijah  to  kiss  his  father  and  mother.  Evidently  we  get 
a  glimpse  here  of  one  of  the  rustic  landed  families  of  Is- 
rael. Likewise,  Amos,  probably  the  first  of  the  writing 
prophets,  was  a  herdman  of  Tekoa  and  a  dresser  of  syco- 
more  trees  (Amos  1:1;  7:14,  15).  Hosea  was  probably 
more  familiar  with  rural  than  with  urban  life;  and  the 
quotations  just  made  from  his  book  reveal  his  prejudice 
against  the  city.  Micah  appears  to  have  been  connected 
with  a  country  village  located  in  the  Shephelah,  where,  as 
Professor  G.  A.  Smith  remarks,  "there  are  none  of  the  con- 
ditions or  of  the  occasions  of  a  large  town''  (55);  and 
Micah's  book  is  especially  concerned  with  the  peasantry 
of  the  agricultural  districts.  Thus  we  see  that  for  about 
the  first  hundred  and  fifty  years  of  its  existence  —  i.  e., 
from  Elijah  to  Micah  —  the  new  theology  was  rustic,  and 
not  urban,  in  its  main  connections.  It  was  formulated  in 
the  country. 

But  in  the  last  half  of  the  eighth  century  b.  c,  pro- 
phetism,  tardily  following  the  line  of  the  kingship,  was 
drawn  into  the  centripetal  movement  of  population  and 

*  Plausible  grounds  have  been  advanced  for  the  view  that  the  great 
center  of  the  new  theology  was  in  the  Jerameelite  Negeb ;  but  this  does 
not  affect  our  point,  for  the  Negeb  was  one  of  the  most  primitive  outlying 
sections  of  Israel. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  166 

power.  Isaiah,  the  great  contemporary  of  Micah,  carried 
the  message  of  the  new  theology  into  the  city  of  Jerusa- 
lem ;  and  from  Isaiah  onward  prophetism  appears  in  con- 
nection with  city  life. 

§  93.  —  One  who  rightly  studies  the  works  of  the  pro- 
phets in  connection  with  the  other  literature  of  Israel, 
and  in  the  light  of  universal  history,  cannot  fail  to  see 
that  the  prophets  are  unconsciously  dealing,  in  large 
part,  with  problems  involved  in  cleavage. 

The  basis  of  cleavage  in  the  times  of  the  prophets  was 
in  great  part  shifted  from  slavery  to  land  monopoly,  al- 
though the  institution  of  slavery  survived  in  vigor  from 
an  earlier  time.  There  was  a  vast  lower  class.  Above 
this  was  outspread  a  smaller  upper  class  which  owned  a 
part  of  the  lower  class  and  all  of  the  soil  under  its  feet. 
The  upper  stratum  —  of  mixed  blood,  and  calling  itself 
^^Israel,"  par  excellence  —  was,  and  had  been  for  several 
generations,  contracting  upon  itself  by  the.  operation  of 
the  powerful  economic  forces  that  we  have  described. 
The  small  aristocrats  and  the  peasant  land  monopolists 
were  being  depressed  into  the  lower,  unpropertied  social 
stratum. 

The  prophets,  representing  primarily  the  rural  aris- 
tocracy, were  greatly  scandalized  by  the  concentration  of 
property.  They  held  it  to  be  immoral  for  a  large  land- 
owner to  take  the  estate  of  some  smaller  monopolist  who 
was  indebted  to  him,  but  could  not  discharge  his  obliga- 
tions. Interest  on  loans  (rendered  "usury")  was  also  for- 
bidden as  unbrotherly  and  wrong.  These  ideas  are  strange 
to  one  who  has  been  reared  in  a  modern,  commercial  so- 
ciety ;  but  in  the  times  that  we  are  studying  they  expressed 
the  ignorant  reaction  of  the  country  against  the  city,  of 
tribalism  against  commercialism.  In  the  eyes  of  the  more 
primitive  and  less  fortunate  Israelites,  it  was  just 
as  wrong  for  a  wealthy  landowner  to  foreclose  a  mortgage 
upon  his  less  wealthy  brother  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  as 
it  was  for  a  man  to  take  by  force  the  land  of  one  who  owed 
him  nothing.    These  two  kinds  of  cases,  unlike  in  es- 


166  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

sence,  are  the  same  in  outward  form;  and  hence  they 
were  thrown  into  one  class  by  the  more  primitive  sections 
of  Israelite  society.  In  the  light  of  these  considerations, 
already  alluded  to  in  an  earlier  connection,  we  begin  to 
see  more  clearly  how  it  was  that  Elijah  could  make  an 
impressive  point  in  denouncing  Ahab  for  seizing  the  land 
of  Naboth.  It  is  evident  that  Ahab  had  no  mortgage 
against  Naboth ;  and  that  the  procedure  was  indefensible 
(to  say  nothing  of  the  murder);  but  the  economic  sense  of 
the  rural  aristocracy  made  no  fine  distinctions.  The 
Ahab-Naboth  case,  in  one  of  its  prominent  aspects,  repre- 
sented the  forcible  seizure  of  the  land  of  a  small  monopo- 
list by  one  of  the  larger  monopolists;  and  was  not  this 
just  what  was  becoming  all  too  common  in  Israel?  The 
protests  of  the  eighth-century  prophets  indicate  that  con- 
centration was  not  abated  in  their  times.  "Woe  to  them 
that  devise  iniquity!"  exclaims  the  prophet  Micah.  "They 
covet  fields,  and  seize  them,  and  houses,  and  take  them 
away :  and  they  oppress  a  man  and  his  family,  even  a  man 
and  his  heritage"  (Micah  2:1,  2).  The  prophet  Isaiah 
takes  up  the  same  strain:  "Woe  unto  them  that  join 
house  to  house,  that  lay  field  to  field,  till  there  be  no 
room,  and  ye  be  made  to  dwell  alone  in  the  midst  of  the 
land!"  (Isaiah  5:8).  The  concentration  of  property,  and 
the  contraction  of  the  upper  class  went  steadily  forward 
in  Israel  and  in  the  oriental  world  at  large,  just  as  it  has 
in  Greece,  Rome,  western  Europe,  and  modern  America. 
The  wealthier  Israelites,  in  order  to  protect  what,  under 
the  existing  system,  were  their  legitimate  rights,  were 
perhaps  often  compelled  to  resort  to  force  and  cunning 
when  foreclosing.  The  only  difference  between  ancient 
and  modern  forms  of  the  process  is,  that  in  ancient  times 
it  was  accomplished  rudely,  while  in  modern  times  both 
creditors  and  debtors  have  learned  to  be  more  polite. 

According  to  the  prophets,  then,  the  action  of  a 
wealthier  Israelite  in  ejecting  his  poorer  brethren  was  a 
sin  on  the  part  of  the  individual;  and  such  sins  were 
among  the  causes  of  the  bad  condition  of  Israel.    In  com- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  167 

menting  on  the  doctrine  of  the  prophets,  Dr.  Kirkpatrick 
says :  "No  doubt  there  were  not  a  few  among  the  wealthy 
nobles  of  Micah's  day  who  prided  themselves  on  not  being 
guilty  of  injustice.  Yes!  Perhaps  they  were  entirely 
within  their  legal  rights  when  they  seized  the  land  of 
some  poor  neighbor  who  through  bad  seasons  and  mis- 
fortune and  pressure  of  heavy  taxes  had  failed  to  pay  his 
debts  and  fallen  into  their  power.  But  was  conduct  like 
that  brotherly?"  (56).  Evidently,  the  modern  commenta- 
tor endorses  the  doctrine  of  the  prophets. 

§  94.  —  In  sharp  contrast  with  the  claims  of  the  pro- 
phets, not  only  on  this  point,  but  on  others,  a  scientific 
treatment  of  the  subject  must,  we  think,  hold,  not  that 
the  condition  of  Israel  was  the  result  of  bad  individual 
conduct,  but  that  bad  personal  conduct  was  the  result 
of  the  condition  of  Israel.  Contraction  of  the  upper  class 
is  a  natural  incident  of  private  land  monopoly.  Private 
ownership  of  the  earth,  as  we  have  seen  over  and  over 
again,  is  the  second  great  historical  basis  of  cleavage, 
human  slavery  being  the  first;  and  the  prophets  never 
had  anything  to  say  against  either  of  these  foundations  of 
cleavage.  It  is  true  that  the  prophet  Jeremiah  (chapter 
34)  demands,  in  the  name  of  Yahweh,  the  liberation  of 
certain  specified  slaves;  but  these  individuals  were  free- 
born  persons,  of  Israelite  parentage.  "Every  man  should 
let  his  manservant,  and  every  man  his  maidservant,  be- 
ing an  Hebrew  or  an  Hebrewess,  go  free;  that  none 
should  serve  himself  of  them,  of  a  Jew  his  brother."  This 
proclaims  no  universal,  or  social,  emancipation ;  and  it  is 
only  an  echo  of  the  exclusive  "brotherliness"  of  primitive 
tribalism.  The  real  attitude  of  the  prophets,  which  in 
this  respect  was  like  that  of  their  contemporaries,  is  rep- 
resented by  the  passage  already  quoted  from  Leviticus  25. 
This  passage,  it  will  be  recalled,  forbids  the  reduction  of 
free-born  Israelite  brethren  to  slavery,  but  commands  the 
purchase  of  bondmen  forever  from  foreigners  and  from 
strangers  that  sojourn  among  the  people.  The  settlement 
of  a  country,  as  we  have  already  observed,  gives  oppor- 


168  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

tunities  for  the  formation  of  both  large  and  small  estates. 
But  the  small  estates,  equally  with  the  large  ones,  repre- 
sent the  principle  of  monopoly;  and  the  smaller  propri- 
etors must  accept  the  consequences  of  the  institution  on 
which  their  property  is  based.  But  in  ancient  Israel  the 
smaller  monopolists  made  a  great  outcry.  They  de- 
manded, first  of  all,  that  they  be  permitted  to  borrow 
from  the  wealth  of  their  brethren,  the  larger  monopolists, 
without  paying  interest.  (This  wealth,  we  must  re- 
member, consisted  principally  of  the  appropriated  labor 
products  of  the  lower  class).  Then,  when  they  were  un- 
able to  repay  their  loans,  they  protested  against  the  seiz- 
ure of  their  estates.  In  brief,  they  wanted  to  be  taken  by 
the  loan  route  more  fully  into  the  fortunate  upper  class 
of  "brethren"  who  fattened  on  special  privileges. 

Of  course, .  foreclosure  was  a  very  painful  procedure. 
But,  upon  the  basis  of  the  social  institution  of  private 
earth  monopoly,  there  was  nothing  wrong  in  the  adding 
of  house  to  house  and  field  to  field.  If  the  less  fortunate 
monopolists  had  not  grace  enough  to  take  the  standpoint 
of  their  more  fortunate  brethren,  and  give  up  their  es- 
tates to  their  creditors,  it  was  natural  that  their  credi- 
tors should  eject  them  by  force,  with  little  ceremony,  and 
often  with  brutality.  It  is  true  that  the  creditors  might 
have  been  more  polite  about  it,  and  that  in  the  rudeness  of 
the  foreclosures  there  was  opportunity  for  the  improve- 
ment of  individual  conduct.  But  when  we  have  narrowed 
the  question  down  to  the  basis  of  politeness  we  have 
passed  the  point  where  we  can  ask,  with  Dr.  Kirkpatrick, 
whether  it  was  brotherly. 

§  95.  —  We  have  already  fully  recognized  that  the 
demand  of  the  prophets  for  personal  righteousness  was 
broader  than  the  limits  of  this  particular  question;  and 
we  have  indeed  criticised  this  aspect  of  their  preaching 
merely  by  way  of  introduction  to  a  more  general  view  of 
their  claims. 

From  beginning  to  end,  the  prophetic  doctrine  of  in- 
dividual righteousness  as  a  remedy  for   existing  social 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  169 

conditions  was  cast  on  the  same  lines.  The  prophets  de- 
clared, in  effect,  that  the  troubles,  of  Israel  were  due,  first, 
to  unfaithfulness  to  Yahweh,  and,  second,  to  personal 
unrighteousness;  and  while  they  never  ceased  to  demand 
ritual  faithfulness  to  the  covenant  god  of  Israel,  they 
more  and  more  assimilated  personal  righteousness  to  his 
worship.  Viewing  society  from  the  standpoint  of  indi- 
vidualism, they  said,  in  effect:  "Let  every  citizen  firmly 
resolve  to  become  a  better  citizen  and  a  better  man ;  and 
then,  when  every  man  is  good,  the  world  will  be  right." 
Into  this  claim  their  prescription  resolves  in  final 
analysis;  and  we  shall  consider  the  prophets  for  a  space 
in  their  character  as  individualistic  moralists. 

§  96.  —  We  cannot  better  illustrate  the  main  point 
that  we  are  trying  to  make  in  connection  with  the  pro- 
phets in  this  character  than  by  recurring-  to  an  earlier 
stage  of  our  survey.  When  studying  the  struggle  for  ex- 
istence which  prevails  among  animals  and  men  in  the 
state  of  nature,  we  saw  that  the  fighting  and  slaughter 
and  hatred  and  evil  passions  of  primeval  times  grew  di 
rectly  out  of  the  relative  limitation  of  the  food  supply. 
The  resources  of  the  world  were  sufficient  for  all  men,  if 
men  had  possessed  the  knowledge,  the  tools,  the  social  or- 
ganization, and  cooperative  training  and  habits  of  thought 
necessary  to  the  development  of  those  resources.  But  in 
the  state  of  nature  all  these  necessary  things  are  lacking. 
Hence  the  struggle  for  existence  among  prehistoric  men 
and  among  v/ild  animals.  Evil  conduct  is  not  the  cause 
of  their  troubles.  On  the  contrary,  their  troubles  are  the 
cause  of  their  evil  conduct.  Their  conduct,  in  last  analy- 
sis, rests  on  a  cosmic  basis,  and  not  on  the  ground  of  in- 
dividual ill  will.  It  would  have  been  fatuous  for  a  pre- 
historic prophet  to  preach  the  virtues  of  good  will,  and  to 
urge  every  savage  to  cleanse  his  heart  from  all  evil  feel- 
ings, and  to  resolve  to  become  a  better  citizen  and  a  better 
man.  Conditions  are  so  simple  in  primeval  times,  and 
the  distance  from  cause  to  effect  is  so  direct  and  short, 
that  even  a  tyro  can  see  that  the  evil  passions  and  ac- 


170  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

tions  of  primeval  men  are  the  effects  and  not  the  causes 
of  their  troubles. 

The  remedy  for  the  troubles  of  primeval  mankind  — 
so  far  as  those  troubles  could  be  corrected  —  lay,  not  in 
stamping  out  individual  ill  will,  but  in  changing  the  re- 
lations obtaining  between  man  and  his  physical  environ- 
ment. If  he  had  not  learned  how  to  develop  the  earth's* 
resources  man  would  have  remained  on  the  level  of  ani- 
mality.  The  foundation  of  human  development  is  to  be 
sought  in  those  material  arts  whereby  nature  is  entrapped, 
circumvented,  and  controlled  by  the  human  intellect.  De- 
stroy all  knowledge  of  material  art,  and  you  reduce  pres- 
ent day  people  to  the  levels  of  animality  and  the  primitive 
struggle  for  existence.  Nothing  in  the  line  of  morality 
would  prevent  retrogression.  To  be  sure,  human  progress 
involves  moral  progress  —  but  as  effect  rather  than  as 
cause.  Those  who  think  and  speak  about  morality  as  if 
it  were  a  cause,  and  not  a  phase  of  something  far  more 
inclusive,  do  not  understand  the  real  nature  of  morality. 
To  advocate  "righteousness"  as  a  primary  factor  of  hu- 
man development  is  like  advising  a  man  to  lift  himself  by 
his  boot-straps.  The  real  nature  of  human  progress  is  to 
be  found  in  the  intellectual  development  of  man. 

§  97.  —  Intellectual  development,  however,  has  not 
been  uniform  in  the  human  race.  The  artificial  progress 
of  early  man,  as  we  have  learned,  was  not  everywhere  the 
same;  and  this  inequality  of  art  threw  out  into  even 
bolder  relief  the  inequality  of  nature.  Under  these  con- 
ditions, cosmic  forces,  acting  unconsciously  —  without 
human  planning,  —  pounded  out  an  engine,  or  institution, 
through  which  art  could  operate.  In  the  midst  of  the 
primitive  struggle  for  existence  the  beginnings  of  material 
art  and  progress  converted  the  petty  fights  of  small  social 
groups  into  the  great  wars  of  tribes  and  nations,  and 
ushered  in  the  historic  period.  The  engine  through  which 
art  worked  out  into  civilization  was  cleavage;  and  under 
this  institution  three  great  historic  civilizations  have  been 
thus  far  projected  above  the  plane  of  barbarism. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  171 

In  the  age  of  the  new  theology,  however,  the  evil 
tendencies  of  cleavage  in  oriental  society  had  plainly  over- 
balanced its  benefits.  It  cannot  be  too  many  times  em- 
phasized that  the  prophets  found  themselves  in  the  midst 
of  a  situation  that  forced  the  vast  majority  of  the  lower 
class  in  a  multiplying  population  to  bid  against  each  other 
for  the  favor  of  a  small  upper  class  which  monopolized 
the  physical  environment.  On  the  whole ^  the  resulting 
evils  were  the  outcome  of  no  human  planning.  The  situ- 
ation proceeded  to  the  same  issue  all  over  Israel.  It  pro- 
ceeds at  length  to  the  same  issue  in  every  civilization.  To 
the  superficial  observer,  it  seems  indeed  as  if  the  upper 
class  were  in  a  vast  conspiracy  against  the  lower.  But 
this  is  only  in  appearance.  Never  in  human  history  has 
there  been  such  a  conspiracy.  Cleavage  is  primarily  a 
result  of  the  cosmic  forces  that  raise  human  society  out 
of  animality.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  many  wealthy  men 
have  taken  deliberate  evil  advantage  of  the  needs  of  poor 
men.  Such  sins  give  color  to  the  charge  of  a  conspiracy. 
But  they  are  incidental  phenomena  tvithin  the  larger  cir- 
cle of  relations  based  upon  social  cleavage  itself ;  and  they 
are,  in  truth,  properly  to  be  dealt  with  on  the  individual 
basis.  Whether  the  rich  take  culpable  advantage  of  the 
poor  or  not,  it  is  inevitable  (if  our  general  thesis  be  cor- 
rect) that  social  evolution  should  everywhere  uncon- 
sciously involve  an  upper  class,  based  at  first  on  monopoly 
of  human  beings,  and  later  on  monopoly  of  the  earth. 
When  land  monopoly  reaches  its  inevitable  issue,  it  pro- 
duces the  situation  that  existed  in  the  times  of  the  pro- 
phets. A  small  upper  class  monopolizes  the  soil,  the 
source  of  all  supply.  The  individuals  of  the  lower  class, 
under  the  constant  pressure  of  immediate  bodily  needs, 
and  without  property  of  any  kind,  bid  against  each  other 
for  opportunity  to  work.  Wages  are  naturally  at  the 
hand-to-mouth  level.  The  lower  class  cannot  accumulate 
property.  The  individuals  in  the  upper  class,  not  unrea- 
sonably imbued  with  the  idea  of  the  uncertainties  of  life, 
struggle  to  increase  their  resources  to  the  greatest  pos- 


172  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

sible  degree.  Those  below  the  line  of  cleavage,  driven  by 
immediate  physical  necessity,  do  the  deeds  that  come  un- 
der the  head  of  the  sins  of  poverty.  Those  above  the  line 
of  cleavage  commit  the  characteristic  sins  of  the  spoiled 
children  of  wealth.  But  the  social  problem  involved  in 
the  situation  is  not  the  issue  of  individual  unrighteous- 
ness. On  the  contrary  the  unrighteousness  is  the  result 
of  the  social  problem.  Certain  observations  by  Dr.  E.  B. 
Andrews  respecting  modern  social  conditions  are  perti- 
nent: "Few  of  the  wrongs  brought  to  light,"  he  says, 
"involve  personal  guilt  or  sin  on  anyone's  part.  They 
mainly  consist  of  social  maladjustments  for  which  no  one 
in  particular  is  responsible,  and  which  are  to  be  removed, 
if  at  all,  by  general  social  effort"   (57). 

§  98.  —  In  addition  to  extracts  already  made  from 
the  prophets,  we  now  reproduce  a  number  of  passages 
which  more  fully  exhibit  their  attitude  with  reference  to 
the  general  problem.    In  these  passages  we  shall  notice  — 

Clear  evidence  of  a  sharp  line  of  social  cleavage; 

Extreme  dependence  on  the  part  of  the  lower  class; 

Luxury  in  the  upper  class,  indicating  the  diversion 
of  lower-class  labor  from  production  of  capital  and  other 
useful  wealth; 

An  intensely  individualistic  tone  on  the  part  of  the 
prophets. 

"Yahweh  will  enter  into  judgment  with  the  elders  of 
his  people,  and  the  princes  thereof:  It  is  ye  that  have 
eaten  up  the  vineyard;  the  spoil  of  the  poor  is  in  your 
houses :  what  mean  ye  that  ye  crush  my  people,  and  grind 
the  face  of  the  poor?  saith  the  lord  Yahweh  of  hosts. 
Moreover  Yahweh  said,  Because  the  daughters  of  Zion 
are  haughty,  and  walk  with  stretched  forth  necks  and 
wanton  eyes,  walking  and  mincing  as  they  go,  and  make 
a  tinkling  with  their  feet:  therefore  Yahweh  will  smite 
with  a  scab  the  crown  of  the  head  of  the  daughters  of 
Zion.  .  .  In  that  day  Yahweh  will  take  away  the 
bravery  of  their  anklets,  and  the  cauls  and  the  crescents ; 
the  pendants,  and  the  bracelets,  and  the  mufflers;    the 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  17S. 

headtires  and  the  ankle  chains,  and  the  sashes,  and  the 
perfume  boxes,  and  the  amulets ;  the  rings  and  the  nose 
jewels;  the  festival  robes,  and  the  mantles,  and  the 
shawls,  and  the  satchels;  the  hand  mirrors,  and  the  fine 
linen,  and  the  turbans,  and  the  veils  (Isaiah  3:14  f.). 
Woe  to  them  that  are  at  ease  in  Zion,  and  to  them  that 
are  secure  in  the  mountain  of  Samaria  [the  capitals  of  the 
two  kingdoms  of  Israel],  the  notable  men  of  the  chief  of 
the  nations  to  whom  the  house  of  Israel  come!  .  .  . 
Ye  that  put  far  away  the  evil  day,  and  cause  the  seat  of 
violence  to  come  near;  that  lie  upon  beds  of  ivory  and 
stretch  themselves  upon  their  couches,  and  eat  the  lambs 
out  of  the  flock,  and  the  calves  out  of  the  midst  of  the 
stall;  that  sing  idle  songs  to  the  sound  of  the  viol;  that 
devise  for  themselves  instruments  of  music,  like  David; 
that  drink  wine  in  bowls,  and  anoint  themselves  with  the 
chief  ointments  (Amos  6:1-6).  Forasmuch  therefore  as^ 
ye  trample  upon  the  poor,  and  take  exactions  from  him 
of  wheat;  ye  have  built  houses  of  hewn  stone,  but  ye 
shall  not  dwell  in  them;  ye  have  planted  pleasant  vine- 
yards, but  ye  shall  not  drink  the  wine  thereof  (Amos 
5 :  11).  For  they  know  not  to  do  right,  saith  Yahweh,  who 
store  up  violence  and  robbery  in  their  palaces.  .  . 
And  I  will  smite  the  winter  house  with  the  summer  house ;. 
and  the  houses  of  ivory  shall  perish,  and  the  great  houses 
shall  have  an  end  saith  Yahweh  (Amos  3:10,  15).  For 
I  know  how  manifold  are  your  transgressions  and  how 
mighty  are  your  sins;  ye  that  afflict  the  just,  that  take 
a  bribe,  and  that  turn  aside  the  needy  in  the  gate  (Amos 
5 :  12).  And  I  said,  Hear,  I  pray  you,  ye  heads  of  Jacob, 
and  rulers  of  the  house  of  Israel :  is  it  not  for  you  to 
know  judgment?  who  hate  the  good  and  love  the  evil ;  wha 
pluck  off  their  skin  from  off  them,  and  their  flesh  from 
off  their  bones ;  who  also  eat  the  flesh  of  my  people ;  and 
they  flay  their  skins  from  off  them,  and  break  their  bones : 
yea,  they  chop  them  in  pieces,  as  for  the  pot,  and  as  flesh 
within  the  cauldron  (Micah  3: 1-3).  Their  hands  are  upon 
that  which  is  evil  to  do  it  diligently.    The  prince  asketh,, 


174  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

and  the  judge  is  ready  for  a  reward;  and  the  great  man, 
he  uttereth  the  mischief  of  his  soul.  Thus  they  weave  it 
together.  The  best  of  them  is  as  a  brier.  The  most  up- 
right is  worse  than  a  thorn  hedge  ( Micah  7 :  3,  4).  Th6 
godly  man  is  perished  out  of  the  earth,  and  there  is  none 
upright  among  men.  They  all  lie  in  wait  for  blood.  They 
hunt  every  man  his  brother  with  a  net.  A  man's  enemies 
are  the  men  of  his  own  clan  (Micah  7:  2,  6).  Run  ye  to 
and  fro  through  the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  and  see  now, 
and  know,  and  seek  in  the  broad  places  thereof,  if  ye  can 
find  a  man,  if  there  be  any  that  doeth  justly,  that  seeketh 
faithfulness  (Jeremiah  5 : 1).  Wash  you,  make  you  clean; 
put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before  mine  eyes. 
Cease  to  do  evil.  Learn  to  do  well.  Seek  judgment.  Re- 
lieve the  oppressed.  Judge  the  fatherless.  Plead  for  the 
widow"    (Isaiah  1:16,  17). 

§  99.  —  From  the  evidence  already  brought  forward, 
and  in  the  light  of  still  further  evidence,  to  be  cited  pres- 
ently, it  is  clear  that  the  prophets  committed  what  is 
called  in  logic  a  "post-hoc  fallacy."  *  All  around  them 
they  beheld  the  worship  of  Yahweh  mingled  with  the 
service  of  other  gods.  All  around  they  saw  evil  conduct. 
These  things  were  plainly  and  notoriously  associated  with 
the  decline  of  Israel  from  that  glorious  and  ideal  condi- 
tion w^herein  every  free  man  dwelt  safely,  "un- 
der his  vine  and  under  his  fig  tree,  from  Dan  even  to  Beer- 
sheba,"  and  wherein  the  people  "were  many,  as  the  sand 
which  is  by  the  sea  in  multitude,  eating  and  drinking  and 
making  merry."  The  prophets,  giving  expression  to  the 
feeling  of  a  certain  part  of  their  fellow  countrymen,  boldly 
pointed  to  these  things  as  the  causes  of  Israel's  troubles. 
Let  us  not  be  understood  to  claim  that  the  demand  for 
personal  righteousness  cannot  legitimately  be  raised. 
What  we  are  asserting  is,  that  the  prophets,  with  ever  in- 
creasing emphasis,  pointed  to  individual  conduct  as  the 

*  More  fully :    Post  hoc,  ergo  propter  hoc. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  175 

cause  and  cure  of  a  social,  collective,  institutional  mal- 
adjustment. 

Possibly  it  may  be  claimed  that,  after  all,  the  pro- 
phets were  concerned  with  individual  problems,  not  with 
social  problems.  But,  although  they  said  nothing  in  so 
many  words  about  what  we  now  call  the  social  problem, 
it  cannot  be  successfully  claimed  that  their  object  was 
individual,  and  not  social.  Our  inquiry  shows,  by  broad 
and  well  founded  inductions,  that  the  fundamental  difii- 
culty  in  the  age  of  the  prophets  was  collective,  institu- 
tional, cosmic,  and  not  individual.  The  prophets  were 
therefore  trying  to  solve  a  social  problem,  whether  they 
realized  it  or  not;  and  their  program  of  individual 
righteousness  was,  in  effect,  put  forward  as  a  social 
remedy.  They  said  nothing  explicitly  about  society,  be- 
cause society,  as  we  have  seen,  develops  primarily  under 
the  forms  of  individualism.  The  sociological  conception 
was  too  abstract  for  the  ancient  Semitic  mind.  The  pro- 
phets of  Israel  accordingly  took  society  at  its  formal,  or 
face,  value  as  an  individualistic  mass ;  and  since  they  un- 
consciously ignored  its  essence,  they  failed  to  establish 
a  law  of  connection  between  the  phenomena. 

§  100.  —  The  reader  may  not  irrelevantly  ask  what, 
then,  was  the  remedy  for  the  situation. 

We  reply :  Theoretically,  there  was  perhaps  a  rem- 
edy; but  practically,  there  was  no  solution  for  the  prob- 
lem. We  must  lift  our  eyes  from  Israel,  and  look  at  the 
entire  oriental  world.  No  local  corrective,  however  sa- 
gaciously applied,  would  have  been  efficient.  Had  Israel 
succeeded  in  reforming  itself,  and  in  establishing  the 
prosperity  of  all  classes,  the  little  nation  would  have  been 
—  as  it  actually  was  in  time  —  crushed  out  by  one  or 
more  of  the  powerful  and  greedy  empires  around.  These 
empires  were  also  tormented  by  an  internal  pressure 
which  drove  them  to  military  expansion  whenever  and 
wherever  possible.  To  have  been  effective,  a  wise  read- 
justment of  oriental  society  must  have  been  instituted  in 
a  sufficiently  large  number  of  states  to  combine  in  defense 


176  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

of  the  reform.  But  such  a  thing  was  impossible.  Ancient 
oriental  civilization  did  not  possess  the  requisite  intelli- 
gence and  public  spirit.  We  saw  that  the  evils  of  the 
primitive  struggle  for  existence  were  ameliorated,  not 
primarily  by  moral  progress,  but  through  intellectual  ad- 
vance; and  the  same  truth  ever  obtains  with  iron  con- 
sistency. So  far  as  it  permits  of  solution,  the  problem  of 
cleavage  constitutes  a  draft  upon  the  intellect.  The  pro- 
phets did  not  see  that  satisfactory  moral  relations  are 
always,  in  the  long  run,  based  upon  satisfactory  economic 
relations.  They  failed  to  perceive  that  the  organization 
of  mankind  for  the  production  of  food,  clothing,  and 
shelter,  underlies  and  conditions  every  phase  and  quality 
of  human  life. 

§  101.  —  Along  with,  and  incidental  to,  the  social 
preaching  of  the  prophets  there  went  a  theological  devel- 
opment which  must  be  noticed  at  this  point,  although  it 
did  not  proceed  to  its  logical  issue  in  the  official  religion 
of  Israel  until  after  the  Babylonian  Exile. 

The  great,  outstanding  fact  is,  that  Yahweh,  after 
having  been  originally  thought  of  as  a  local  deity,  like 
Chemosh,  or  Dagon,  was  at  length  regarded  by  his  wor- 
shippers as  the  imperial  god  of  heaven  and  earth.  All 
that  the  Israelite  doctrine  of  monotheism  came  to,  how- 
ever, as  hinted  in  an  earlier  connection,  w^as  the  magnifi- 
cation of  Yahweh,  and  the  corresponding  minification  of 
all  other  gods,  until,  in  the  minds  of  his  worshippers,  for- 
eign deities  were  depressed  to  a  very  low  level.  In  the 
furthest  reaches  of  its  thought,  Israel  never  compassed 
the  conception  of  an  exclusive  God  —  the  Absolute  God  of 
modern  philosophical  Christianity.  The  monotheism 
finally  reached  by  Israel  was  a  practical,  not  an  absolute, 
monotheism.  This  finds  expression,  for  instance,  in  the 
first  verse  of  the  eighty-second  psalm,  where  it  is  declared 
that  God  "judgeth  among  the  gods.''.  Likewise,  we  read 
in  Exodus  15 :  11,  "Who  is  like  unto  thee,  O  Yahweh, 
among  the  gods?"  To  the  same  effect,  in  Exodus  12: 12, 
the  following  declaration  is  put  into  the  mouth  of  Yah- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  177 

weh :  "Against  all  the  gods  of  Egypt  I  will  execute  judg- 
ments." This  qualified,  or  practical,  monotheism  was 
carried  over  bodily  into  early  Christianity.  The  apostle 
Paul,  in  1  Corinthians  8  and  10  says :  "Concerning  there- 
fore the  eating  of  things  sacrificed  to  idols,  we  know  that 
no  idol  is  anything  in  the  world,  and  that  there  is  no  God 
but  one.  For  though  there  be  that  are  called  gods, 
whether  in  heaven  or  on  earth;  as  there  are  gods  many, 
and  lords  many ;  yet  to  us  there  is  one  God,  the  Father.'' 
"But  I  say  that  the  things  which  the  Gentiles  sacrifice, 
they  sacrifice  to  demons  [incorrectly  translated  "devils"], 
and  not  to  God.  And  I  would  not  that  ye  should  have  com- 
munion with  demons."  In  these  passages  Paul  recog- 
nizes that  physical  idols  are  nothing,  but  that  the  idols 
represent  inferior  gods  and  lords  in  the  realm  of  spir- 
its  (58). 

§  102.  —  As  just  observed,  the  doctrine  of  the  imper- 
ial supremacy  of  Yahweh  did  not  become  a  part  of  the 
official  religion  of  Israel  until  after  the  Exile;  and  we 
must  now  note  more  fully  the  pre-Exilic  basis  of  that  doc- 
trine. 

We  have  seen  that,  according  to  the  national  tradi- 
tions, Yahweh  had  positively  demonstrated  his  superior- 
ity over  all  gods  with  whom  he  had  come  in  contact.  He 
had  chosen  Israel,  and  given  them  victory  over  the 
Egyptians,  Canaanites,  Philistines,  Moabites,  Ammonites, 
Edomites,  Syrians,  and  Amalekites.  Finally,  at  the  time 
of  the  bloody  revolutions  of  Jehu  and  Jehoash  in  the  first 
age  of  the  new  theology,  he  had  driven  out  the  god  of 
Tyre.  He  was  thus  greater  than  the  gods  of  all  these  na- 
tions. He  had  shown  that  he  could,  if  he  would,  vanquish 
and  subject  any  god  with  whom  he  came  in  conflict.  In 
this  way  the  idea  of  his  imperial  supremacy  had  oppor- 
tunities for  growth,  and  for  authoritative  and  extrava- 
gant statement,  before  the  age  of  the  writing  prophets. 

According  to  the  new  theology,  as  represented  by  the 
prophets,  it  was  evidently  the  intention  of  Yahweh  to  sub- 

12 


178  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

ject  the  world  to  his  cliosen  people  if  Israel  should  re- 
main faithful  to  their  side  of  the  Sinai  contract.  But  his 
plans  were  interrupted  by  the  sins  of  Israel.  If  Israel 
would  repent,  these  plans  would  go  on  to  their  logical 
issue.  Yahweh  would  make  Israel  an  imperial  nation; 
and  prove  that  he  was  an  imperial  god. 

This  doctrine  took  complete  possession  of  the  pro- 
phets. It  seemed  so  plain  and  simple  to  them  that  they 
marvelled  at  the  obtuseness  of  their  fellow-countrymen. 
They  begged  and  pleaded  for  the  people  to  be  faithful  to 
Yahweh,  and  to  practice  personal  righteousness.  They 
vehemently  promised  that  if  their  program  were  carried 
into  effect,  Yahweh  would  abundantly  pardon,  and  that 
Israel  should  see  peace,  prosperity  and  national  grandeur. 
But  the  mass  of  the  people  could  not  be  moved.  The 
bloody  revolution  of  Jehu  represented  the  high- water 
mark  of  popular  interest  in  the  new  theology.  The  pro- 
phets, however,  were  not  satisfied  with  this,  for  Yahweh 
evidently  demanded  more,  as  proved  by  the  fact  that 
prosperity  did  not  return  to  Israel.* 

It  is  in  the  bitter  disappointment  of  the  prophets  at 
the  indifference  of  the  majority  that  we  must  seek  the 
proximate  influence,  or  force,  which  prompted  what  little 
these  men  did  in  the  development  of  Israel's  monotheisni. 
They  announced  their  diagnosis  of  the  situation.  It 
seemed  perfectly  clear  to  them.  But  it  did  not  seem  so 
clear  and  practical  to  the  majority  of  their  contempo- 
raries. "Repent!"  cried  the  prophets.  And  the  people,  by 
their  natural  indifference  and  inertia,  replied  in  effect: 
"We  will  not  repent."  "But  think  of  what  Yahweh  has 
done  for  his  people!"  exclaimed  the  prophets  in  despera- 
tion. "In  the  olden  time  he  raised  Israel  up  to  a  splendid 
state  of  prosperity  and  glory.  Other  nations  were  sub- 
ject to  us.  Every  free  man  sat  under  his  own  vine  and  fig 
tree,  and  enjoyed  his   own  heritage.     Their   lines  were 

*  There  were  a  number  of  "reformations"  in  addition  to  that  of 
Jehu  and  Jehoash ;    but  we  make  no  mention  of  them  in  the  text. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  179 

cast  in  pleasant  places;  and  Yahweh  gave  them  a  goodly 
heritage.  His  plans  were  going  on  to  grand  fruition.  But 
Israel  deserted  him,  and  walked  unrighteously.  There- 
fore, after  bearing  long  with  you,  he  hid  his  face,  and 
turned,  and  did  you  hurt.  If  ye  will  but  return,  he  will 
again  do  you  good.  The  baalim  and  all  foreign  gods  are 
vanities  and  lies !  They  are  subject  to  Yahweh,  every  one 
of  them!  Behold,  what  a  mighty  helper  Israel  is  volun- 
tarily deserting!"  The  prophets  were  not  conscious  that 
their  emphasis  upon  the  imperial  power  and  supremacy 
of  Yahweh  was, on  the  whole,  a  novel  item  in  their  preach- 
ing; and  this  is  a  very  significant  fact.  Their  theology, 
indeed,  was  plainly  incidental,  and  subordinate,  to  their 
social  preaching.  They  made  use  of  Yahweh  as  a  mag- 
net wherewith  to  draw  the  people  into  a  program  which 
they  thought  would  solve  the  social  problem ;  and  it  was 
but  natural,  under  such  circumstances,  that  they  should 
present  the  god  of  Israel  in  the  most  alluring  and  at- 
tractive and  powerful  character  possible. 

We  have  here  all  the  elements  of  a  dramatic  situation 
involving  the  most  intense  mental  stress.  About  a  cen- 
tury after  the  death  of  Elijah,  and  while  continuing  to 
exhort  by  word  of  mouth,  the  prophets  began  to  commit 
their  doctrines  to  writing.  Their  contemporaries  would 
not  heed  their  advice;  and  they  would  leave  a  witness 
to  future  ages.  The  writings  of  the  pre-Exilic  prophets 
reveal  a  desperation  perhaps  never  exceeded  in  the  hist- 
ory of  the  human  mind.  Beginning  with  Amos  in  the 
eighth  century,  they  conclude  with  Jeremiah  in  the  sixth 
century;  and  so  fierce  did  the  invective  become  in  this 
last  great  prophet  before  the  Exile,  that  when  we  wish 
to  characterize  a  speech  that  goes  to  a  great  length  of 
censure  and  abuse,  we  sometimes  call  it  a  "jeremiad." 
The  prophets  applied  the  most  extravagant  terms  of  re- 
proach to  their  fellow  countrymen.  They  became 
fanatics,  possessed  of  one  idea,  going  about  with  dis- 
hevelled hair  and  wild  eyes,  crying  out  alternately  the 
vengeance  and  love  of  Yahweh. 


180  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

§  103.  —  The  prophetic  doctrine  was  crystallized  in  a 
startling  form  by  the  advance  of  the  Assyrians. 

We  have  seen  that  it  was  no  new  thing  in  ancient 
thought  for  a  god  to  bring  trouble  upon  his  people,  and 
even  to  give  them  into  captivity.  "In  every  misfortune 
that  overtook  a  commonwealth/'  says  Professor  Duncker, 
"in  every  calamity,  a  bad  harvest,  an  infectious  disorder, 
a  reverse  in  war,  the  Greeks  saw  the  effects  of  divine 
anger"  (59).  In  Numbers  21 :  29  we  read :  "Thou  art  un- 
done, O  people  of  Chemosh.  He  hath  given  his  sons  as 
fugitives,  and  his  daughters  into  captivity."  In  the  Moa- 
bite  inscription,  we  saw  that  Chemosh  was  angry  with  his 
land,  and  permitted  the  Moabites  to  be  chastised;  but 
that  afterward  he  turned,  and  fought  for  them  again. 

In  line  with  these  ideas,  the  prophets  made  a  condi- 
tional prediction  respecting  the  future  of  their  people. 
They  declared  that  unless  Israel  repented,  Yahweh  would 
bring  a  foreigner  upon  them,  who  should  carry  them  away 
captive  as  a  punishment  for  their  sins.  But  the  prophets 
added  that  if  this  calamity  came  to  pass,  a  righteous  rem- 
nant should  at  length  return  to  dwell  in  the  land  in  the 
knowledge  and  fear  of  Yahweh. 

§  104.  —  About  the  year  721  b.  c.^  the  northern  Is- 
raelite kingdom  was  brought  under  subjection  by  As- 
syria; part  of  its  inhabitants  were  carried  into  a  cap- 
tivity from  which  they  never  returned ;  and  the  land  was 
flooded  with  foreign  colonists.  This  left  only  the  little 
kingdom  of  Judah  in  the  south  as  the  legal  representative 
of  the  life  and  traditions  of  Israel. 

About  a  century  and  a  quarter  later,  however,  in  the 
year  597  b.  c.^  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  began 
the  captivity  of  Judah  also. 

§  105.  —  We  should  note  particularly  that  the  captive 
Judeans  were  not  all  carried  away  at  the  same  time. 
There  were  two  deportations,  about  ten  years  apart. 

And  we  should  also  take  particular  notice  of  the  so- 
cial character  and  station  of  the  exiles  in  the  two  de- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  181 

portations,  for  at  this  critical  period  the  fundamental  fact 
of  cleavage  comes  out  again  into  bold  projection. 

In  Jeremiah  27 :  20  we  read  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
^^carried  away  captive  Jeconiah,  the  king  of  Judah,  and 
all  the  nobles  of  Judah  and  Jerusalem."  In  Jeremiah 
24 : 1  we  read,  to  practically  the  same  effect,  that  the  king 
of  Babylon  "carried  away  captive  Jeconiah,  king  of 
Judah,  and  the  princes  of  Judah,  with  the  craftsmen 
and  smiths  from  Jerusalem  and  brought  them  to  Baby- 
lon." In  2  Kings  24 :  14,  15,  we  read,  somewhat  more 
fully,  that  the  king  of  Babylon  "carried  away  all  Jerusa- 
lem, and  all  the  princes,  and  all  the  mighty  men  of  valor, 
even  ten  thousand  captives,  and  all  the  craftsmen  and  the 
smiths.  And  he  carried  away  Jeconiah  to  Babylon,  and 
the  king's  mother,  and  the  king's  wives,  and  his  officers, 
and  the  chief  men  of  the  land,  carried  he  into  captivity 
from  Jerusalem  to  Babylon."  In  short,  the  first  deporta- 
tion was  recruited  principally  from  the  upper  class. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  are  told  in  2  Kings  24 :  14  that 
"none  remained  save  the  poorest  sort  of  the  people  of  the 
land."  Over  these  the  king  of  Babylon  appointed  an  un- 
der-king,  giving  him  the  name  of  Zedekiah. 

There  might  have  been  but  one  deportation  had  not 
the  under-king  revolted  against  the  overlordship  of  the 
king  of  Babylon.  This  occurred  about  ten  years  after 
the  commencement  of  the  Judean  captivity.  Nebuchad- 
nezzar with  his  army  again  made  a  successful  assault 
upon  Jerusalem.  The  second  batch  of  captives  now  taken 
away  was  of  course  largely  from  the  lower  class. 

But  even  now  the  country  was  not  entirely  depopu- 
lated. We  read,  in  Jeremiah  52 :  16  that  "the  captain  of 
the  guard  left  of  the  poorest  of  the  land  to  be  vinedressers 
and  husbandmen."  (Cf.  Jeremiah  40:7;  and  2  Kings 
25 :  12). 

§  106. — The  exilic  social  situation  has  been  so  well 
set  forth  by  Professor  G.  A.  Smith  that  we  reproduce  his 
words. 


182  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

^'The  first  host  of  exiles,  the  captives  of  598,  com- 
prised .  .  .  the  better  class  of  the  nation,  and  appear 
to  have  enjoyed  considerable  independence.  .  .  . 
They  remained  in  communities,  with  their  own  official 
heads,  and  at  liberty  to  consult  their  prophets.  They 
were  sufficiently  in  touch  with  one  another,  and  suffi- 
ciently numerous,  for  the  enemies  of  Babylon  to  regard 
them  as  a  considerable  political  influence,  and  to  treat 
with  them  for  a  revolution  against  their  captors.  But 
Ezekiel's  strong  condemnation  of  this  intrigue  exhibits 
their  leaders  on  good  terms  with  the  government.  Jere- 
miah bade  them  throw  themselves  into  the  life  of  the  land ; 
buy  and  sell,  and  increase  their  families  and  property. 
.  .  .  There  is  every  reason  to  believe  therefore  that 
this  captivity  was  an  honorable  and  an  easy  one.  The 
captives  may  have  brought  some  property  with  them; 
they  had  leisure  for  the  pursuit  of  business  and  for  the 
study  and  practice  of  their  religion.  .  .  .  Some,  by 
their  learning  and  abstinence,  rose  to  high  positions  in 
the  court.  Probably  to  the  end  of  the  exile  they  remained 
the  good  figs,  as  Jeremiah  had  called  them.  Theirs  was, 
perhaps,  the  literary  work  of  the  exile;  and  theirs,  too, 
may  have  been  the  wealth  which  rebuilt  Jerusalem. 

"But  it  was  different  with  the  second  capitvity,  of 
589.  After  the  famine,  the  burning  of  the  city,  and  the 
prolonged  march,  this  second  host  of  exiles  must  have 
reached  Babylonia  in  an  impoverished  condition"   (60). 

§  107.  —  Although  they  were  fairly  well  treated,  the 
exiled  Israelites  (who  were  now  called  "Jews")  looked 
back  upon  their  far  away  native  land  with  homesick  long- 
ing. The  stirring  events  of  the  time  stimulated  reflection 
upon  the  history  and  religion  of  their  forefathers.  Israel 
in  exile  pondered  over  the  past. 

During  and  subsequent  to  the  Babylonian  Exile  the 
religious  consciousness  of  Israel  gradually  absorbed  the 
new  theology.  The  great  prophets,  most  of  whom  had 
been  long  dead,  seemed  to  be  wonderfully  and  miracu- 
lously vindicated  by  history.    Looking  backward  over  the 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  183 

past,  the  exiles  thought  how  Yahweh  had  chosen  their 
forefathers;  how  a  contract  of  mutual  faithfulness  had 
been  made  between  people  and  god;  and  how  much  had 
been  done  for  Israel  by  their  covenant  god.  They  thought 
how  they  had  not  done  unto  their  god  as  he  had  done  unto 
them ;  and  how  they  had  insulted  him  by  worshipping  the 
Canaanite  deities  and  foreign  gods  whom  he  had  defeated. 
Then  they  remembered  in  bitterness  of  spirit  how  trouble 
had  begun  to  come  upon  Israel.  Following  this,  they  re- 
viewed the  rise  of  the  new  theology  and  the  new  prophet- 
ism,  recalling  how  the  prophets  had  warned  the  people 
that  their  troubles  were  due  to  unfaithfulness;  and  that 
if  they  did  not  repent  of  their  sins,  Yahweh  would  bring 
upon  them  an  invader  who  should  carry  them  away  cap- 
tive as  the  culmination  of  all  their  misfortunes.  And 
now,  behold!  All  had  come  to  pass  as  the  prophets  had 
said.  Israel  was  in  captivity  in  a  foreign  land.  The  pro- 
phets, therefore,  grew  in  stature  during  the  Exile. 

§  108. — But  what  does  it  signify  to  say  that  the 
religious  consciousness  of  Israel  absorbed  the  new  the- 
ology? Does  it  mean  that  the  great  social  object  of  the 
prophets  was  at  length  attained?  and  that  Israel  was 
henceforth  to  set  the  pace  for  humanity  in  the  work  of 
social  reform?  Nothing  of  the  kind!  We  are  once  more 
face  to  face  with  the  ancient  phenomenal  dualism  whereof 
cleavage  is  an  illustration.  The  prophets  triumphed,  — 
and  the  prophets  failed !  Unless  we  realize  this  tremend- 
ous paradox,  we  are  not  prepared  fully  to  appreciate  their 
work. 

Let  us  first  look  at  the  prophetic  triumph.  The 
official  religion  of  Israel  before  the  Exile  admitted  the 
godship  of  other  deities  than  Yahweh  on  equal  terms  with 
him;  and  his  sovereignty  was  unofficial.  But  the  reli- 
gion of  Israel  as  at  length  officially  established  after  the 
Exile  incorporated  the  doctrine  of  the  moral  holiness  and 
the  imperial  sovereignty  of  Yahweh ;  and  while  admitting 
the  existence  of  other  gods,  placed  them  at  an  utterly  in- 
ferior level.     Yahweh  became  the  master  of  the  whole 


184  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

earth,  and  all  the  heaven,  and  the  waters  under  the  earth. 
The  Exile,  as  the  culmination  of  the  troubles  of  once  im- 
perial and  expanding  Israel,  was  held  to  prove  the  pro- 
phetic claim  that  Yahweh  was  the  supreme  god.  On  be- 
half of  Israel  he  had  defeated  every  god  against  whom  he 
had  been  matched,  until  at  last  the  unfaithfulness  of  his 
chosen  people  had  exhausted  his  patience,  and  forced  him 
to  reverse  his  policy.  Instead  of  driving  away  foreign 
gods,  he  now  brought  these  deities  and  their  votaries 
against  his  chosen  people  by  way  of  punishment.  Accord- 
ing to  this  view,  which  was  advocated  by  the  prophets 
in  opposition  to  the  old,  conventional  theology,  the  defeat 
of  Israel  by  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  was  not  the 
defeat  of  Yahweh,  as  the  older  theology  claimed.  It  was 
the  work  of  Yahweh  himself,  who  thus  evidently  con- 
trolled all  nations  and  gods  at  his  imperial  pleasure.  Ex- 
treme ritual  faithfulness  to  Yahweh  in  this  magnified 
character  became,  therefore,  the  cornerstone  of  the  official 
religion  of  Israel  after  the  Exile.  By  extreme  faithful- 
ness to  Yahweh  as  thus  conceived,  the  Jews  were  to  win 
back  the  favor  which  they  had  forfeited.  A  prince  of  the 
Davidic  line  was  to  be  seated  in  glory  on  the  throne  of  his 
father  David.  He  was  to  be  the  anointed  of  Yahweh,  like 
David  of  old  —  the  new  Messyah,  or  Messiah.  Unto  him 
should  be  the  desire  of  all  nations,  and  the  government 
should  be  upon  his  shoulder.  The  splendor  of  the  first 
national  kingdom,  interrupted  only  by  the  sins  of  Israel, 
was  to  return ;  and  all  the  world  was  to  acknowledge  the 
sovereignty  of  Yahweh  and  the  rule  of  Israel.  Judaism 
officially  elevated  ritual  to  the  level  of  ethics.  Practically, 
indeed,  it  went  even  further  than  this.  It  lifted  ritual 
above  ethics;  and  the  moralism  of  prophecy  slumbered 
in  the  long  night  of  legalism,  only  to  be  awakened  at  last 
by  the  great  paradox  of  history,  the  prophet  of  Nazareth. 
But  w^e  are  almost  ahead  of  our  subject.  Let  us  now 
turn  to  the  failure  of  prophetism.  The  prophets  did  not 
preach  a  morality  that  can  save  society.  Their  injunc- 
tions respecting  righteousness  were  barren  of  social  con- 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  185 

tent.  They  were  individualists  in  the  midst  of  a  social 
fabric  whose  problems  called  for  something  far  more  than 
the  individualistic  interpretation.  They  did  not  under- 
stand that  individual  conduct  is  an  expression  of  cosmic 
forces.  They  did  not  know  that  in  last  analysis  the  prob- 
lems of  society  grow  out  of  cosmic  conditions,  and  not 
out  of  personal  ill  will ;  and  that  while  it  is  of  course  best 
that  the  individual  should  at  all  times  do  good  according 
to  his  light,  the  problems  of  society,  as  such,  can  only  be 
rightly  approached  from  the  cosmic  side,  and  not  from  the 
standpoint  of  personal  righteousness.  Doubtless  the  ex- 
iled Israelites,  under  the  influence  of  temporary  emotions, 
made  many  good  resolutions  along  the  line  of  personal 
righteousness;  but  after  the  Exile,  as  we  shall  presently 
see,  social  cleavage  and  the  social  problem  existed  as  be- 
fore.* 

*  As  this  examination  is  attempting  a  scientific  inquiry  in  the  field 
of  sociology,  and  not  in  that  of  theology,  we  are  debarred  from  saying  any- 
thing in  the  text  about  the  religious  value  and  significance  of  the  history 
tinder  survey.  But  we  here  note  the  following  suggestions :  The  ethical 
monotheism  of  Israel  would  never  have  come  into  existence  if  the  righte- 
ousness of  the  prophets  —  i.  e.,  individualistic  righteousness  —  were  a 
valid  counsel  of  social  salvation.  We  interpret  the  psychology  of  the 
prophets  inductively  and  deductively,  as  an  involution  of  ordinary  human 
consciousness.  The  human  consciousness,  as  revealed  more  and  more 
by  modern  psychology  and  sociology,  is  always  animated  by  motives  which 
are  described  from  the  phenomenal  standpoint  by  the  term  "secular." 
That  is  to  say,  the  great  theological  and  religious  movements  of  history, 
whatever  may  be  their  transcendental  significance,  resolve  into  secular 
movements  in  disguise.  Thus  we  exhibit  the  prophets  as  animated  pri- 
marily by  the  desire  for  social  welfare;  and  although  this  interpretation 
of  their  consciousness  will  be  new  to  some  readers,  it  is  not  essentially 
different  from  that  which  has  now  become  a  commonplace  in  the  field  of 
critical  scholarship.  As  our  text  shows,  however,  while  we  agree  on  the 
fact,  we  part  company  with  the  devout  wing  of  critical  scholarship  on 
the  interpretation  of  the  fact.  We  assert  that  the  post-hoc  fallacy  of 
prophetism  saved  the  religion  of  Israel  to  the  world.  This  leads  us  to 
the  second  suggestion:  The  conventional  religions  of  the  heathen  world 
are  based  upon  the  assumption  that  human  salvation  is  mechanically  im- 
parted from  without  by  the  will  of  the  divine.  The  revelation  of  science 
on  the  contrary,  is  that  human  salvation  is  derived  from  within,  by  the 


186  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY, 

§  109.  —  The  mind  of  Israel  during  the  Exile  found 
expression  in  several  new  prophets  who  arose  in  that 
period.  Chief  of  these  is  the  so-called  "Second  Isaiah,"  the 
unknown  author  of  a  part  of  our  present  book  of  Isaiah. 
Only  a  part  of  the  material  in  the  first  thirty-nine  chapters 
of  the  present  book  of  Isaiah  can  possibly  be  attributed 
to  the  original  prophet  of  that  name.  The  remainder  of 
the  book  was  written  long  after  his  time,  during  the  Baby- 
lonian Exile,  and  later  still. 

The  introduction  to  the  book  of  the  second  Isaiah 
is  a  cheerful  proclamation  to  the  captives  from  Judah  and 
Jerusalem :  "Comfort  ye,  comfort  ye  my  people,  saith 
your  god.  Speak  ye  to  the  heart  of  Jerusalem,  and  qvj 
out  to  her  that  her  time  of  service  is  accomplished,  that 
her  iniquity  is  pardoned ;  and  that  She  hath  received  from 
Yahweh's  hand  double  for  all  her  sins"  (Isaiah  40:1,  2). 
At  last,  then,  after  more  than  a  generation,  Israel  is  to 
return  across  the  rough  desert  into  his  own  land. 

The  prophet  speaks  in  a  highly  figurative  way  about 
the  return  through  the  wilderness :  "The  voice  of  one  that 
crieth.  Prepare  ye  in  the  wilderness  the  way  of  Yahweh, 
make  straight  in  the  desert  a  highway  for  our  god.  Everjr 
valley  shall  be  filled  up,  and  every  mountain  and  hill 
shall  be  levelled ;  and  the  crooked  shall  be  made  straight,, 
and  the  rough  places  smooth"  (  Isaiah  40  :  3,  4). 

§  110.  —  But  how  will  all  this  come  to  pass?  Is  Yah- 
weh to  make  a  visible  descent  from  heaven,  and  restore 
his  people  to  Judah  and  Jerusalem?  The  prophet  makes 
no  such  claim.  He  simply  puts  a  theological  interpreta- 
tion upon  the  history  going  on  around  him.    A  new  power, 

development  of  the  intellect.  All  human  progress  is  primarily  based  on 
the  intellect.  In  harmony  with  science,  and  in  startling  contrast  with 
heathen  religions,  the  faith  of  Israel,  as  based  upon  the  work  of  the 
prophets  and  extended  into  Christianity  by  Jesus  and  Paul,  is  the  only 
religion  which  has  ever  practically  succeeded  in  bringing  the  emotions 
into  line  with  the  intellect  in  affirmation  of  the  doctrine  that  we  are 
naturally  in  the  attitude  of  having  "no  good  thing  in  us,"  and  of  "working 
out  our  own  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling." 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  187 

coming  from  the  east  and  from  the  north  —  a  great  host, 
led  by  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia  —  was  in  full  career  of  con- 
quest. The  doings  of  Cyrus  were  being  noised  all  over 
the  world;  and  the  prophetic  spirit  of  Israel  was  quick 
to  utilize  the  situation.  According  to  the  prophet,  king 
Cyrus  was  an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  Yahweh.  At 
the  bidding  of  Yahweh  he  was  to  conquer  the  corrupt  and 
declining  Babylonians,  and  let  the  captive  Israelites  re- 
turn to  their  old  home.  In  Isaiah  41 :  25  we  read :  "I 
have  raised  up  one  from  the  north,  and  he  is  come;  from 
the  rising  of  the  sun  one  that  calleth  upon  my  name ;  and 
he  shall  come  upon  rulers  as  upon  mortar,  and  as  the 
potter  treadeth  clay."  In  chapter  44 :  28  the  prophet  is 
even  more  explicit,  indicating  the  advancing  conqueror 
by  name:  "Cyrus  is  my  shepherd,  and  shall  perform  all 
my  pleasure,  even  saying  of  Jerusalem,  She  shall  be  built ; 
and  to  the  temple,  Thy  foundation  shall  be  laid." 

§  111.  —  The  aristocratic  tendency  is  irrepressible. 
Looking  into  the  future  in  imagination,  one  of  these  later 
prophets  declares:  "They  shall  build  up  the  old  wastes; 
they  shall  raise  up  the  former  desolations ;  and  they  shall 
repair  the  waste  cities,  the  desolations  of  many  genera- 
tions. And  strangers  shall  stand  and  feed  your  flocks; 
and  aliens  shall  be  your  plowmen  and  vinedressers.  But 
ye  shall  be  named  the  priests  of  Yahweh.  Men  shall  call 
you  the  ministers  of  our  god.  Ye  shall  eat  the  wealth  of 
the  nations,  and  to  their  glory  shall  you  succeed"  (Isaiah 
61:4,  7).  In  other  words,  after  the  restoration  Israel 
as  a  whole  is  to  occupy  the  position  of  an  upper  class  in 
respect  of  the  world  at  large.  The  instinct  of  cleavage 
will  not  down. 

§  112. —  In  the  year  538  B.  c.^  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia, 
overthrew  the  kingdom  of  Babylon,  and  rode  triumphantly 
into  the  great  city  on  the  Euphrates.  His  aim  was  to  con- 
quer the  world.  The  greatest  power  that  now  opposed  his 
westward  march  was  Egypt.  Some  ten  years  before  this 
time,  Egypt,  observing  the  rise  of  Persia,  had  joined  an 


188  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

alliance  against  that  power.  In  line  with  his  general 
policy,  king  Cyrus  now  gave  the  Jewish  exiles  permission 
to  return  to  their  old  home,  stipulating,  of  course,  that 
they  acknowledge  his  overlordship,  and  pay  him  tribute. 
Judah  would  be  a  good  buffer-province  between  Egypt  and 
Persia;  and  would  serve  as  a  convenient  base  of  opera- 
tions in  a  campaign  against  the  land  of  the  Nile.  From  the 
standpoint  of  Cyrus,  the  return  of  the  Jewish  exiles  was 
merely  a  Persian  colonizing  scheme. 

§  113. — Concerning  the  social  state  of  the  Jews 
after  the  Exile  we  reproduce  the  following  from  Professor 
G.  A.  Smith : 

"Some  sixty  years  after  the  earlier,  and  some  fifty 
years  after  the  later,  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  two  deporta- 
tions, we  find  the  Jews  a  largely  multiplied  and  still  regu- 
larly organized  nation,  with  considerable  property  and  de- 
cided political  influence.  Not  more  than  forty  thousand 
can  have  gone  into  exile,  but  forty-two  thousand  returned, 
and  yet  left  a  large  portion  of  the  nation  behind  them. 
The  old  families  and  clans  survived ;  the  social  ranks  were 
respected;  the  rich  still  held  slaves;  and  the  former 
menials  of  the  temple  could  again  be  gathered  together. 
Large  subscriptions  were  raised  for  the  pilgrimage,  and 
for  the  restoration  of  the  temple"   (61). 

The  Exile,  then,  despite  its  theological  influence,  ef- 
fected no  change  in  the  fundamental  economic  institutions 
of  Israel.  Cleavage  remained,  based  as  before  upon  slav- 
ery and  private  property  in  land.  The  second  chapter  of 
the  book  of  Ezra  supplies  a  long  list  of  the  free  families 
that  returned,  omitting  not  to  add  that  they  were  accom- 
panied by  seven  thousand,  three  hundred  and  thirty-seven 
slaves  (Cf.  Nehemiah  7).*  With  respect  to  landed  property 
ancestral  claims  were  doubtless  revived  as  far  as  possible. 
All  the  free  men,  however,  may  have  acquired  estates  at 

*Doubtless  these  family  lists  are  to  be  taken  as  a  post-exilic  census, 
rather  than  as  a  literal  record  of  the  "return;"  but  since  neither  version 
affects  our  thesis  adversely,  and  since  both  support  it,  the  historical 
point  need  not  be  pressed  in  this  connection. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  189- 

first ;  but  as  the  later  history  shows,  the  contraction  of  the 
monopolistic  upper  stratum  began  promptly. 

§  114. — Without  attempting  to  trace  this  history  fur- 
ther we  shall  close  our  study  of  Israel  and  of  oriental  civ- 
ilization with  a  few  additional  notices. 

We  have  seen  that  the  return  from  the  Exile  did  not 
include  all  the  Jews  who  had  been  settled  in  Babylonia. 
About  eighty  years  after  the  first  home-coming,  a  second 
band  of  exiles,  among  whom  was  Ezra  the  scribe,  crossed 
the  wilderness.  A  few  years  later  still  a  Jewish  aristo- 
crat and  Persian  court-functionary,  named  Nehemiah,  ob- 
tained the  permission  of  the  Persian  king  to  regulate  mat- 
ters in  Judah.  Armed  with  governmental  powers  he  ap- 
peared in  Jerusalem  about  445  b.  c.  An  interesting  view 
of  economic  conditions  at  that  time  is  found  in  Nehemi- 
ah's  book,  from  which  we  reproduce  the  following  passage, 
already  quoted  in  part: 

"Then  there  arose  a  great  cry  of  the  people  and  of 
their  wives  against  their  brethren  the  Jews.  For  there 
were  that  said.  We,  our  sons  and  our  daughters  are  many. 
Let  us  get  corn,  that  we  may  eat  and  live.  Some  also  there 
were  that  said.  We  are  mortgaging  our  fields,  and  our 
vineyards,  and  our  houses.  Let  us  get  corn,  because  of  the 
dearth.  There  were  also  that  said.  We  have  borrowed 
money  for  the  king's  tribute  upon  our  fields  and  our  vine- 
yards.  Yet  now  our  flesh  is  as  the  flesh  of  our  brethren, 
our  children  as  their  children.  And,  lo,  we  bring  into 
bondage  our  sons  and  our  daughters  to  be  slaves,  and  some 
of  our  daughters  are  brought  into  bondage  already. 
Neither  is  it  in  our  power  to  help  it,  for  other  men  have 
our  fields  and  our  vineyards.  And  I  was  very  angry  when 
I  heard  their  cry  and  these  words.  Then  I  consulted  with 
myself,  and  contended  with  the  nobles  and  the  rulers,  and 
said  unto  them.  Ye  exact  interest  every  one  of  his  brother. 
And  I  held  a  great  assembly  against  them.  And 
I  said  unto  them.  We  after  our  ability  have  redeemed 
our  brethren  the  Jews,  which  were  sold  unto  the 
heathen;   and   would  ye  even   sell   your   brethren,   and 


190  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

should  they  be  sold  unto  us?  Then  held  they  their 
peace,  and  found  never  a  word.  Also  I  said,  the 
thing  that  ye  do  is  not  good.  Ought  ye  not  to  walk  in  the 
fear  of  our  god,  because  of  the  reproach  of  the  heathen, 
our  enemies?  And  I  likewise,  my  brethren  and  my  slaves, 
do  lend  them  money  and  corn  on  interest.  I  pray  you,  let 
us  leave  off  this  interest.  Restore,  I  pray  you,  to  them, 
^even  this  day,  their  fields,  their  vineyards,  their  olive- 
yards,  and  their  houses,  also  the  hundredth  part  of  the 
money,  and  of  the  corn,  the  wine,  and  the  oil,  that  ye  ex- 
act of  them.  Then  said  they.  We  will  restore  them,  and 
will  require  nothing  of  them ;  so  will  we  do,  even  as  thou 
sayest.  Then  I  called  the  priests,  and  took  an  oath  of 
them,  that  they  should  do  according  to  this  promise.  Also 
I  shook  out  my  lap,  and  said.  So  God  shake  out  every  man 
from  his  house,  and  from  his  labor,  that  performeth  not 
this  promise;  even  thus  be  he  shaken  out,  and  emptied. 
And  all  the  congregation  said.  Amen,  and  praised  Yah- 
weh.  And  the  people  did  according  to  this  promise"  (Ne- 
hemiah  5 :  1-13). 

Doubtless  a  large  part  of  the  trouble  in  this  case  grew 
out  of  the  special  circumstances  wherein  the  attendance 
and  labor  of  rich  and  poor  alike  were  demanded  upon  the 
hasty  re-building  of  the  Jerusalem  wall.  But  the  illus- 
tration exhibits  universal  elements  which  cannot  be 
ignored ;  and  it  throws  a  lurid  light  upon  the  social  condi- 
tions of  the  time.  Nehemiah  was  a  good  and  an  altruistic 
man ;  but  his  individualistic  interpretations  and  remedies, 
although  they  have  been  on  record  for  more  than  two  thou- 
sand years,  have  not  been  serviceable  to  social  reform.  A 
further  quotation  from  the  same  chapter  shows  Nehemiah 
more  fully  in  the  character  of  a  benevolent  and  wealthy 
ruler  : 

"Moreover  from  the  time  that  I  was  appointed  to  be 
their  governor  in  the  land  of  Judah,  from  the  twentieth 
year  even  unto  the  two  and  thirtieth  year  of  Artaxerxes 
the  king,  twelve  years,  I  and  my  brethren  have  not  eaten 
the  bread  of  the  governor.    But  the  former  governors  that 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  191 

were  before  me  were  chargeable  unto  the  people,  and  took 
of  them  bread  and  wine  at  the  rate  of  forty  shekels  of  sil- 
ver. Yea,  even  their  slaves  bare  rule  over  the  people;  but 
so  did  not  I,  because  of  the  fear  of  God.  Yea,  also  I  con- 
tinued in  the  work  of  this  wall,  neither  bought  we  any 
land;  and  all  my  slaves  were  gathered  thither  unto  the 
work.  Moreover  there  were  at  my  table  of  the  Jews  and 
the  rulers  an  hundred  and  fifty  men,  beside  those  that 
<?ame  unto  us  from  among  the  heathen  that  were  round 
about  us.  Now  that  which  was  prepared  for  one  day  was 
one  ox  and  six  choice  sheep;  also  fowls  were  prepared  for 
me,  and  once  in  ten  days,  store  of  all  sorts  of  wine.  Yet 
for  all  this  I  demanded  not  the  bread  of  the  governor,  be- 
cause the  bondage  was  heavy  upon  this  people"  (Nehe- 
miah  5 :  14-18). 

The  conditions  here  illustrated  prevailed,  not  only  be- 
fore the  times  referred  to,  but  from  those  days  onward 
into  the  age  of  Jesus.  Indeed,  the  same  conditions,  modi- 
:fied  only  by  the  gradual  introduction  of  western  ideas  and 
capital,  exist  in  that  country  today.  The  social  problem 
had  passed  from  the  acute  to  the  chronic  form  before  the 
Exile;  and  it  was  nothing  less  than  chronic  after  the  Ex- 
ile. The  post-Exilic  proverbs,  wisdom  writings,  and 
psalms  contain  material  of  importance  to  the  doctrine  of 
cleavage.  We  cannot  cite  nor  discuss  it  in  full  here;  and 
shall  make  only  a  few  quotations  and  comments. 

The  post-Exilic  sections  of  the  book  of  Isaiah  yield 
material  which  reflects  a  social  condition  exactly  repeat- 
ing that  of  the  older  times.  In  the  following  passages  an 
unknown  prophetic  writer  puts  these  words  into  the 
mouth  of  Yahweh:  "Behold,  in  your  fast-day  ye  follow 
your  [own]  business  [i.  e.,  to  the  neglect  of  my  service], 
oppressing  all  your  workmen.  —  Is  not  this  the  fast  that  I 
have  chosen?  to  loose  the  bonds  of  wickedness,  to  undo  the 
yoke,  and  to  let  the  oppressed  go  free,  and  that  ye  break 
every  yoke?  —  None  calleth  in  righteousness  and  none 
pleadeth  in  truth.  They  trust  in  vanity,  and  speak  lies. 
They  conceive  mischief,  and  bring  forth  iniquity.  —  Their 


192  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

works  are  works  of  iniquity,  and  the  act  of  violence  is  in 
their  hands.  Their  feet  run  to  evil,  and  they  make  haste 
to  shed  innocent  blood.  Their  thoughts  are  thoughts  of 
iniquity.  Desolation  and  destruction  are  in  their  paths. 
The  way  of  peace  they  know  not,  and  there  is  no  judgment 
in  their  goings.  —  Judgment  is  turned  away  backward, 
and  righteousness  standeth  afar  off.  For  truth  is  fallen 
in  the  street,  and  uprightness  cannot  enter.  Yea, 
truth  is  lacking;  and  he  that  departeth  from  evil  [i.  e., 
ceases  to  oppress  others]  maketh  himself  a  prey  [to  the 
wicked]"  (Isaiah  58 :3,  6;  59 :4,  6,  7,  8, 14,  15). 

In  the  first  appendix  to  the  book  of  Proverbs,  by  Agur 
ben  Jakeh,  we  find  a  familiar  strain :  "There  is  a  genera- 
tion whose  teeth  are  as  swords,  and  their  jaw  teeth  as 
knives,  to  devour  the  poor  from  off  the  earth,  and  the 
needy  from  among  men"  (Proverbs  30:14). 

The  introduction  to  the  second  appendix  lays  much 
emphasis  upon  judging  righteously  the  cause  of  the  poor 
and  afllicted.  The  body  of  the  second  appendix  is  a  well 
known  picture  of  the  ideal  upper-class  wife,  whose  husband 
sits  among  the  elders  and  rulers  at  the  city  gate.  She  is  a 
good  manager  and  worker  in  her  household ;  she  carefully 
orders  the  tasks  of  her  slaves  and  hirelings ;  she  is  kind  to 
all  and  gives  to  the  needy  poor.  But,  significantly,  this  is 
only  a  picture  of  an  ideal,  for  the  writer  asks,  "Who  can 
find  such  a  woman?"  (Proverbs  31). 

The  book  of  Proverbs  itself  has  much  to  say  about 
upper  and  lower  classes.  Thus :  "The  rich  ruleth  over  the 
poor;  and  the  borrower  is  slave  to  the  lender"  (Proverbs 
22:  7).  "The  strong  city  of  the  rich  man  is  his  wealth. 
The  poverty  of  the  poor  is  their  destruction"  (Proverbs 
10 :  15).* 

*We  must  bear  in  mind  that  the  word  translated  "poor"  does  not 
describe  the  entire  lower  class.  It  makes  no  reference  to  the  many 
legal  slaves ;  and  refers  primarily  to  free-born  Israelites  who,  by  their 
own  or  their  ancestors'  misfortunes,  find  themselves  in  the  lower,  un- 
propertied  class.  It  is  from  such  as  these  that  the  ranks  of  the  poorly 
paid  "hired  servants"  were  doubtless  filled. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  193 

Observe  the  complacent  theism  of  the  aristocrat  who 
writes:  "Thou  maintainest  my  lot.  The  lines  are  fallen 
unto  me  in  pleasant  places.  Yea,  I  have  a  goodly  heri- 
tage'' (Psalm  16:5,6). 

In  the  apocryphal  book,  The  Wisdom  of  the  Son  of 
Sirach,  dating  from  the  second  century  b.  c.^  we  find  these 
words :  "What  agreement  is  there  between  the  hyena  and 
a  dog?  and  what  peace  between  the  rich  and  the  poor?  As 
the  wild  ass  is  the  lion's  prey  in  the  wilderness:  so  the 
rich  eat  up  the  poor.  As  the  proud  hate  humility :  so  doth 
the  rich  abhor  the  poor"  (Sirach  13 :  18-20).  "The  rich 
hath  great  labor  in  gathering  riches  together ;  and  when  he 
resteth  he  is  filled  with  his  luxuries.  The  poor  laboreth  in 
his  poor  estate ;'  and  when  he  leaveth  off  he  is  still  needy" 
(Sirach  31:3,  4). 

The  son  of  Sirach  also  sets  forth  his  views  upon  upper 
and  lower  classes  in  the  following  passage : 

"The  wisdom  of  a  learned  man  cometh  by  opportunity 
of  leisure;  and  he  that  hath  little  business  shall  become 
wise.  How  can  he  get  wisdom  that  holdeth  the  plow,  and 
that  glorieth  in  the  goad,  that  driveth  oxen,  and  is  occu- 
pied in  their  labors,  and  whose  talk  is  of  bullocks?  He 
giveth  his  mind  to  make  furrows;  and  is  diligent  to  giv& 
the  kine  fodder.  So  every  carpenter  and  workmaster, 
that  laboreth  night  and  day :  and  they  cut  and  grave  seals,^ 
and  are  diligent  to  make  great  variety,  and  give  them- 
selves to  counterfeit  imagery,  and  watch  to  finish  a  work. 
The  smith  also  sitting  by  the  anvil,  and  considering  the 
iron  work,  the  vapor  of  the  fire  wasteth  his  fiesh,  and  he 
fighteth  with  the  heat  of  the  furnaces.  The  noise  of  the 
hammer  and  the  anvil  is  ever  in  his  ears,  and  his  eyes  look 
still  upon  the  pattern  of  the  thing  that  he  maketh.  He 
setteth  his  mind  to  finish  his  work,  and  watcheth  to  polish 
it  perfectly.  So  doth  the  potter  sitting  at  his  work,  and 
turning  the  wheel  about  with  his  feet,  who  is  always  care- 
fully set  at  his  work,  and  maketh  all  his  work  by  number. 

13 


194  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

He  f ashioneth  the  clay  with  his  arm,  and  boweth  down  his 
strength  before  his  feet.  He  applieth  himself  to  lead  it 
over;  and  he  is  diligent  to  make  clean  the  furnace.  All 
these  trust  to  their  hands;  and  every  one  is  wise  in  his 
work.  Without  these  a  city  can  not  be  inhabited;  and 
they  shall  not  dwell  where  they  will,  nor  go  up  and  down. 
They  shall  not  be  sought  for  in  public  council,  nor  sit  high 
in  the  congregation.  They  shall  not  sit  on  the  judges'  seat, 
nor  understand  the  sentence  of  judgment.  They  can  not 
declare  justice  and  judgment;  and  they  shall  not  be  found 
where  parables  are  spoken"  (Sirach  38:  24-33). 

At  the  time  when  the  son  of  Sirach  wrote  his  book, 
Judah  had  been  brought  under  the  rule  of  Greece.  The 
oriental  world  had,  indeed,  long  since  lost  its  primacy.  A 
new  civilization  had  arisen  out  of  barbarism,  and  was  ac- 
quiring the  headship  of  the  world.  The  center  of  histori- 
cal interest  gradually  shifts  from  the  eastern  seaboard  of 
the  Mediterranean  to  the  northern  coasts  of  the  Great  Sea. 

(1)— Craig,  The  Semitic  Series,  I  (N.  Y.,  1899),  Preface. 
(2) — Erman,  Life  in  Ancient  Egypt  (London,  1894.   Tirard's  trans.), 
p.  99f.  Cf.  pp.  80,  81. 

(3) — Brugsch,   History  of  Egypt    (London,  1881.     Smith's   trans.), 

I,  p.  28.    Cf.  Meyer,  in  Encyclopedia  Biblica  (N.  Y.,  1902),  III,  col.  3752. 

(4)_Bagehot,  Physics  and  Politics,  (N.  Y.,  1881),  p.  25. 

(5) — Maspero,  The  Dawn  of  Civilization  (London,  1896.  McClure's 
trans.),  pp.  52,  53  and  note. 

(6)— Idem,  chap.  4.     Cf.  p.  70. 

(7) — Rawlinson,  History  of  Ancient  Egypt  (Boston,  1882),  II,  pp. 
141,  142.     Cf.  Rogers,  History  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria   (N.  Y.,  1901), 

II,  pp.  278-280,  314. 

(8) — Lenormant,  Ancient  History  (London,  1871),  II,  p.  353. 

(9) — Maspero,  Dawn  of  Civ.,  p.  268. 

(10) — Idem,  p.  300.  Cf.  Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians  (N.  Y., 
1900),  p.   175. 

(11)— Sayce,  ibid.,  p.  67.  Cf.  p.  149.  Cf.  Maspero,  Dawn  of  Civ. 
pp.  742-745. 

(12)— Mueller,  in  Encyclopedia  Biblica  (N.  Y.,  1901),  II,  col.  1224. 

(13) — Rawlinson,  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,  I,  p.  493.  Cf.  Wil- 
kinson, The  Ancient  Egyptians  (Boston,  1883),  I,  pp.  38,  280,  284.  Cf. 
Rogers,  History  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  II,  p.  280. 


ORIENTAL   CIVILIZATION.  195 

(14)— Cf.  Brugsch,  History  of  Egypt,  I,  p.  403.  Cf.  Rogers,  His- 
tory of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  II,  p.  224.  Cf.  Ashley,  English  Econo- 
mic History  (N.  Y.,  1894),  I,  pp.  70,  115  note  9.  Cf.  Mommsen,  History 
of  Rome  (N.  Y.,  Dickson's  trans.),  I,  pp.  261,  262. 

(15) — Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  p.  173.    Cf.  p.  107. 

(16) — Rawlinson,  History  of  Ancient  Egypt,  I,  496. 

(17)— Erman,  Life  in  Ancient  Egypt,  pp.   180-186. 

(18)— EwALD,  History  of  Israel   (London,  1867,  Trans.),  I,  p.  294. 

(19) — Brugsch,  History  of  Egypt,  I,  p.  29. 

(20)— Idem,  pp.  28,  29. 

(21) — Maspero,  Life  in  Ancient  Egypt  and  Assyria  (N.  Y.,  1899, 
Trans.),  p.  9. 

(22)— Idem,  p.  11. 

(23) — Idem,  Dawn  of  Civ.,  p.  296.    Cf.  p.  290  for  a  case  in  point. 

(24) — Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  p.  67. 

(25)— W.  R.  Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites  (London,  1894), 
p.  29. 

(26) — Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  p.  256. 

(27) — Maspero,  Dawn  of  Civ.,  p.  303.  Cf.  Rogers,  History  of  Baby- 
lonia and  Assyria,  II,  p.  133.  Cf.  Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  p. 
173. 

(28)— Erman,  Life  in  Ancient  Egypt,  pp.  80,  81.     Cf.  p.  99. 

(29)— Maspero,  Dawn  of  Civ.,  p.  679. 

(30)— King,  in  Encyclopedia  Biblica   (N.  Y.,  1899),  I,  col.  433. 

(31) — Rogers,  History  of  Babylonia  and  Assyria,  II,  pp.  278,  279. 

(32) — Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  pp.  228,  229.  On  oriental 
education,  cf.  Laurie,  Historical  Survey  of  Pre-Christian  Education 
(London,  1900),  pp.  38-48,  57-61. 

(33)— Renan,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel  (Boston),  II,  p.  225. 

(34)— Cf.  McCurdy,  History,  Prophecy,  and  the  Monuments  (N. 
Y.,  1896),  I,  chap.  2.  Cf.  Barton,  Semitic  Origins  (N.  Y.,  1902),  pp. 
1-29,  270.  Cf.  Kent,  History  of  the  Hebrew  People  (N.  Y.  1899),  I, 
chap.  5. 

(35)— CoRNiL,  The  Prophets  of  Israel  (Chicago,  1897),  p.  3f.  Cf. 
Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament  (N.  Y., 
1892),  pp.  2-4. 

C36)— Journal  of  the  Anthropological  Institute,  XI,  pp.  364,  365. 
Cited  by  Spencer,  Principles  of  Sociology  (N.  Y.,  1895),  I,  p.  774.  Cf. 
Sully,  Studies  of  Childhood  (N.  Y.,  1896),  p.  103f.  Cf.  Larcom,  A  New 
England  Girlhood  (Boston,  1891),  p.  137. 

(37)— Mommsen,  History  of  Rome,  I,  pp.  213,  214.  Cf.  Reville, 
Native  Religions  of  Mexico  and  Peru  (London,  1895),  p.  77. 

(38)— W.  R.  Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites  (London,  1894), 
pp.  29,  30.    Cf.  McCurdy,  History,  Prophecy,  etc.,  (N.  Y.,  1897),  II,  p.  133. 

(39)— Allen,  Evolution  of  the  Idea  of  God  (N.  Y.,  1897),  pp.  80, 
81,  82. 


196  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


(40)— Driver,  in  Encyclopedia  Biblica  (N.  Y.,  1902),  III,  article 
"Mesha." 

(41) — Wellhausen,  History  of  Israel  and  Judah  (London,  1891), 
p.  23. 

(42)— W.  R.  Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel  (London,  1897),  p.  379. 
(43)— Cf.  BuDDE,  The  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile  (N.  Y.,  1899), 
chap.  1,  and  passim.    Cf.  Barton,  Semitic  Origins  (N.  Y.,  1902),  chap.  7. 
We  are  greatly  indebted  to  the  excellent  treatise  of  Budde. 

(44) — Cf.  W.  R.  Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites  (London, 
1894),  p.  372.  Cf.  KuENEN,  The  Religion  of  Israel  (London,  1882,  May's 
trans.),  I,  pp.  236f.,  250. 

(45) — Cf.  W.  R.  Smith,  Rel.  of  Semites,  pp.  3,  4.  Cf.  Wellhausen, 
History  of  Israel,  etc.,  (London  1891),  p.  16.  Cf.  Kent,  History  of 
the  Hebrew  People  (N.  Y.,  1899),  I,  pp.  41,  97,  201;  II,  p.  97.  Cf. 
MuRisoN,  Totemism  in  the  Old  Testament  (Biblical  World,  Chicago, 
Sept.  1901). 

(46)— Paton,  Early  History  of  Syria  and  Palestine  (N.  Y.,  1901), 
pp.  1-103.  McCuRDY,  History,  Prophecy,  etc.,  I,  p.  163f. ;  II,  p.  5f.  Well- 
hausen, History  of  Israel,  etc.,  p.  31. 

(47) — Cf.  Budde,  The  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile,  chap.  2. 
(48) — Wellhausen,    History    of    Israel,    etc.,    p.    35.      Cf.    W.    R. 
Smith,  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church  (N.  Y.,  1891),  p.  269. 
McCuRDY,  History,  Prophecy,  etc.,  I,  p  228;    II,  p.  6. 

(49) — Wellhausen,  History  of  Israel,  etc.,  p.  8.  Cf.  Cornil,  His- 
tory of  the  People  of  Israel   (Chicago,  1899),  p.  48. 

(50) — Green,  History  of  the  English  People,  Bk.  3,  chap.  1. 
(51) — Sayce,  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  p.  256. 
(52) — FiSKE,    The    Beginnings   of    New    England    (Boston,    1900), 
p.  245. 

(53)— Bruce,  Apologetics  (N.  Y.,  1899),  p.  280. 
(54)_Paton,   Early   History   of   Syria   and   Palestine,  p.  227.     Cf. 
W.  R.  Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel,  pp.  88,  89. 

(55)— G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets  (N.  Y., 
1898),  I,  p.  377. 

(56) — KiRKPATRicK,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Prophets  (London,  1901), 
pp.  225,  226. 

(57)— Hartford  Seminary  Notes   (Hartford,  Conn.),  IV,  p.  126. 
(58)_Cf.    Toy,  Judaism   and   Christianity    (Boston,    1892),   p.   77f. 
Cf.  W.  R.  Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel   (London,  1897),  p.  59f.     Cf. 
Bruce,  Apologetics,  p.  176f. 

(59) — DuNCKER,  History  of  Greece  (London,  1886.  Alleyne  and 
Abbott's  trans.),  II,  p.  228. 

(60)— G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  Isaiah  (N.  Y.,  1900),  II,  p.  57f. 
(61) — Idem,  ibid. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION. 


§  115. — The  social  development  of  classic  civilization 
began  on  the  same  level  as  did  that  of  the  oriental  world. 
In  the  background  of  the  history  of  Greece  and  Italy,  as 
in  that  of  the  ancient  east,  is  the  shifting  scene  of  tribal 
migration  and  war.  A  passage  relating  to  the  early  ages 
of  Greece,  written  by  the  Greek  historian  Thucydides  in 
the  fifth  century  b.  c.^  is  worth  reproducing  in  this  connec- 
tion for  its  general  suggestiveness : 

"The  country  was  not  regularly  settled  in  ancient 
times.  The  people  were  migratory,  and  readily  left  their 
homes  whenever  they  were  overpowered  by  numbers. 
There  was  no  commerce,  and  they  could  not  safely  hold  in- 
tercourse with  one  another  either  by  land  or  sea.  The 
several  tribes  cultivated  their  own  soil  just  enough  to  ob- 
tain a  maintenance  from  it.  But  they  had  no  accumula- 
tions of  wealth  .  .  .  ,  for  being  without  walls,  they 
were  never  sure  that  an  invader  might  not  come  and  de- 
spoil them.  Living  in  this  manner  .  .  .  ,  they  were 
always  ready  to  migrate;  so  that  they  had  neither  great 
cities  nor  any  considerable  resources"  (1). 

§  116. —  Modern  archaeological  research  proves  that 
there  was  a  prehistoric  civilization  located  on  the  north 
Mediterranean  coasts  prior  to  the  appearance  of  the  Greeks 
and  Romans.  Probably  these  early  communities  were  not 
wholly  swept  away.  Their  people  were  doubtless  partly 
exterminated  and  partly  subjugated  by  the  tribes  that 
came  pouring  down  from  central  and  eastern  Europe  to 
found  the  Greek  and  Roman  communities  of  historic 
times  (2). 

(197) 


198  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

The  earliest  historic  societies  in  these  regions  exhibit 
cleavage  into  upper  and  lower  strata.  In  both  Greece  and 
Italy  the  upper  social  stratum  was  originally  composed  of 
the  clan  aristocracy,  which  constituted  a  slaveholding, 
landowning  class.  This  class  was  the  legal  element  in  the 
State ;  and  it  controlled  the  policies  of  government.  Thus 
we  see  that  the  societies  destined  to  compose  the  classic 
civilization  began  politically  on  the  same  level  as  the 
oriental  world  (3). 

In  society  as  thus  constituted  it  signifies  nothing  to 
the  principle  of  cleavage-capitalization  whether  govern- 
ment assumes  the  monarchial  or  the  republican  form.  Po- 
litical moralists  cannot  extract  lessons  from  the  expe- 
riences of  Greek  and  Koman  republics  in  which  the  "peo- 
ple" cast  out  their  kings,  and  replaced  them  by  frequently 
elected  officers.  For  the  people  in  these  cases  were  like  the 
people  in,  say,  ancient  Israel.  That  is,  they  were  not  the 
people  in  the  modern  sense,  but  merely  the  upper  classes. 
The  establishment  of  an  ancient  republic  was  far  from 
being  a  democratic  event  in  the  modern  sense.  Indeed, 
such  a  procedure  might  rivet  more  firmly  the  power  of  the 
nobility  by  unseating  a  king  who  was  disposed  ^o  remedy 
the  worst  abuses  of  class  rule,  and  substituting  an  official 
whose  tenure  depended  upon  the  good  will  of  an  upper- 
class  electorate  (4). 

§  117. —  No  settled  community  long  exists  without  the 
exchange  of  labor  products.  The  social  history  of  Greece 
and  Italy  was  early  marked  by  the  rise  of  domestic  and 
foreign  trade,  and  the  establishment  of  towns  and  cities. 
This  may  perhaps,  to  some  extent,  be  regarded  as  a  re- 
vival of  the  prehistoric  commerce  of  those  countries. 

§  118. —  Just  as  in  the  Orient,  so  here,  commerce  was 
primarily  the  exchange  of  lower-class  products  among  the 
upper  orders. 

At  first  the  tendency  was  for  commerce  to  remain  in 
the  hands,  or  under  the  proprietary  control,  of  the  nobil- 
ity. It  was  doubtless  to  some  extent  personally  managed 
by  the  nobility  at  first,  but  more  and  more  by  slave-stew- 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION.  199 

ards,  as  was  the  practice  in  the  east.  In  harmony  with 
our  conception,  Mommsen  holds  that  there  was  no  dis- 
tinctively commercial  class  in  early  historic  Rome.  He 
says  : 

"No  special  superior  class  of  merchants  distinct  from 
and  independent  of  the  class  of  landed  proprietors  de- 
veloped itself  in  Eome.  The  reason  for  this  surprising  [?] 
phenomenon  was,  that  the  wholesale  commerce  of  Latium 
was  from  the  beginning  in  the  hands  of  the  large  landed 
proprietors  —  a  hypothesis  which  is  not  so  singular  as  it 
seems.  It  was  natural  that  in  a  country  intersected  by 
several  navigable  rivers  the  great  landholder,  who  was 
paid  by  his  tenants  their  quotas  of  produce  in  kind,  should 
come  at  an  early  period  to  possess  barks ;  and  there  is  evi- 
dence that  such  was  the  case.  The  transmarine  traffic 
conducted  on  the  trader's  own  account  must  therefore 
have  fallen  into  the  hands  of  the  great  landholder,  seeing 
that  he  alone  possessed  the  vessels  for  it  and  —  in  his  pro- 
duce —  the  articles  for  export.  In  fact  the  distinction  be- 
tween a  landed  and  a  moneyed  aristocracy  was  unknown 
to  the  Romans  of  earlier  times ;  the  great  landholders  were 
at  the  same  time  the  speculators  and  the  capitalists"  (5). 

§  119. —  But  the  economic  phase  of  life  in  classic  civ- 
ilization began  to  escape  the  control  of  the  family  nobility 
at  an  early  date  in  the  historical  period.  Commerce  became 
more  and  more  active;  and  began  to  move  in  greater  vol- 
ume and  through  vaster  circuits  than  the  trade  of  the 
Orient.  The  old  nobility,  while  retaining  their  landed  es- 
tates and  slaves,  and  the  monopoly  of  government,  found 
it  advantageous  to  grant  personal  freedom  to  many  of  the 
slave-managers  of  trade,  as  well  as  to  invite  the  settlement 
of  commercial  foreigners  under  guarantee  of  exemption 
from  seizure.  This  was  a  sign  of  the  advancing  differen- 
tiation of  society  —  the  division  of  labor.  The  nobility 
themselves  could  not  manage  their  own  and  the  public  bus- 
iness, and  at  the  same  time  personally  attend  to  the  grow- 
ing demands  of  trade ;  and  it  became  necessary  for  them  to 
enact  laws  guaranteeing  absolute  liberty  and  self-owner- 


200  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ship  to  a  limited  class  in  order  to  secure  the  most  efficient 
management  of  commerce.  These  changes  took  place 
gradually  between  the  eighth  and  fifth  centuries  b.  c. 
Mommsen  writes : 

"Kome  was  in  fact  a  commercial  city,  which  was  in- 
debted for  the  commencement  of  its  importance  to  interna- 
tional commerce,  and  which  with  a  noble  liberality  granted 
the  privilege  of  settlement  to  every  child  of  an  unequal 
marriage,  to  every  manumitted  slave,  and  to  every 
stranger  who  surrendering  his  rights  in  his  native  land 
emigrated  to  Kome"  (6). 

The  following  passage  from  Curtius,  relative  to  con- 
ditions in  Greece  at  the  close  of  the  seventh  century  B.  G., 
should  also  be  read  in  this  connection : 

"Wherever  a  sea  abounding  in  harbors  washed  the 
shore  a  new  class  of  men  was  arising  .  .  .  composed  of 
those  engaged  in  industrial  pursuits  .  .  .  This  class 
would  necessarily  rise  in  proportion  as  trade  spread  over 
all  the  coasts,  and  the  gains  of  commerce  were  reaped 
which  were  flowing  forth  in  rich  abundance  out  of  the  col- 
onies in  the  east  and  west,  out  of  the  interior  of  Asia,  and 
above  all  out  of  the  newly  opened  valley  of  the  Nile. 
These  acquisitions  would  be  accompanied  by  a  universal 
social  transformation;  and  in  Attica,  also,  notwithstand- 
ing that  the  native  nobility  themselves  endeavored  to 
profit  by  the  new  resources,  the  ancient  state  of  things 
could  never  more  be  maintained"  (7). 

§  120. —  The  mercantile  and  manufacturing  classes, 
which  thus  grew  up  and  increased  greatly,  did  not  repre- 
sent the  rise  of  the  people  in  the  modern  sense.  Although 
drawn  from  the  lower  class  by  a  process  of  social  selection, 
they  were  essentially  an  expansion  of  the  upper  class  out- 
side the  limits  of  the  original  clan  aristocracy,  whose  de- 
scendants continued  to  monopolize  the  control  of  the 
State.  The  vast  lower  class  remained  as  before  in  actual 
or  practical  slavery,  its  labor  controlled  by  the  superior 
stratum.  The  mercantile  order  managed  the  exchange  of 
labor  products  in  the  upper  class,  and  grew  rich  by  re- 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION,  201 

taining  as  compensation  some  of  the  wealth  which  passed 
through  its  hands.  Likewise,  the  manufacturing  order 
naturally  found  its  patronage  in  the  upper  class.  Mer- 
chants and  manufacturers  alike  grew  rich;  bought  lands 
and  slaves  of  their  own ;  and  thus  became,  in  fact  if  not  at 
first  in  law,  a  part  of  the  upper  stratum. 

§  121. —  In  the  East,  as  we  have  remarked  before,  the 
growth  of  the  newly  rich  class  probably  did  not  much  ex- 
ceed the  absorptive  power  of  the  older,  noble  families. 
Marriage  and  adoption  assimilated  them  with  the 
clan  aristocracy.  In  classic  civilization,  however,  the 
"third  estate"  grew  so  rapidly  and  so  large  that  a  new  po- 
litical problem  arose. 

The  nobility  of  the  ancient  clanships  were  naturally 
jealous  of  the  newly  rich,  who,  without  aristocratic  con- 
nections or  political  power,  were  somehow  rising  to  a  man- 
ifest economic  equality  with  the  "old  families,"  and  some- 
times to  a  position  of  superiority.  Since  this  new  section 
of  the  upper  class  was  excluded  from  the  government,  it 
lay  under  the  rule  of  the  nobility,  which  possessed  the 
courts  of  justice,  a  monopolistic  knowledge  of  the  unpub- 
lished law  based  on  old  tribal  and  clan  customs,  and  the 
control  of  the  taxing  power.  Thus,  the  older  section  of  the 
upper  class  was  able  to,  and  did,  harass  the  newer  section 
in  many  ways.  Probably  the  strained  relations  between 
them  arose  in  part  out  of  the  economic  obligations  of  the 
older  nobility  to  the  newer  wealthy  men.  To  use  the 
words  of  the  historian  Duncker — 

"As  soon  as  the  mariners  and  traders  attained  a  wider 
and  more  extensive  view  of  life,  and  the  new  impressions 
made  upon  them  by  foreigners  led  to  reflections  and  com- 
parisons, they  must  have  felt  that  their  interests  were  not 
consulted  in  the  government  of  the  nobles,  that  the  com- 
monwealth gave  them  no  chance  of  representing  those  in- 
terests, that  they  had  no  acquaintance  with  the  laws  ac- 
cording to  which  the  nobles  decided  the  rights  of  property 
,  .  .  ,  and  that  .  .  .  judges  awarded  punishments 
and  penalties  according  to  a  very  arbitrary  standard. 


202  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

Why  should  the  merchant  and  the  shipowner,  they  must 
have  inquired,  stand  so  far  below  the  noble?"  (8). 

§  122. —  The  internal  political  history  of  Greece  and 
Kome  narrates  the  struggles  between  these  elements  of  the 
upper  class.  The  old  nobility  was  everywhere  forced  to 
retreat,  and  make  one  concession  after  another.  In  the 
most  progressive  parts  of  Greece  "the  rule  of  the  nobles 
gave  way  to  a  rule  of  the  rich.  Energetic  men  who  had 
made  their  own  way  in  the  world  were  no  longer  excluded 
from  civic  power  and  office"  (9).  Similar  developments 
took  place  in  Rome,  of  whose  history  in  this  period  we  ob- 
tain a  glimpse  in  the  following  passage  by  Mommsen: 

"Beyond  doubt  from  the  very  filrst  a  portion  of  ,the 
leading  plebeian  families  had  attached  themselves  to  the 
movement  party,  partly  from  a  sense  of  what  was  due  ta 
the  fellow-members  of  their  order,  partly  in  consequence 
of  the  natural  bond  which  unites  all  who  are  treated  as  in- 
ferior, and  partly  because  they  perceived  that  concessions 
to  the  multitude  were  inevitable  in  the  issue,  and  that,  if 
turned  to  due  account,  they  would  result  in  the  abroga- 
tion of  the  exclusive  rights  of  the  patriciate  and  would 
thereby  give  to  the  plebian  aristocracy  a  decisive  prepon- 
derance in  the  state.  Should  this  conviction  become  —  as 
was  inevitable  —  more  and  more  prevalent,  and  should  the 
plebeian  aristocracy  at  the  head  of  its  order  take  up  the 
struggle  with  the  patrician  nobility,  it  would  wield  in  the 
tribunate  a  legalized  instrument  of  civil  warfare,  and  it 
might,  with  the  weapon  of  social  distress,  so  fight  its  bat- 
tles as  to  dictate  to  the  nobility  the  terms  of  peace  and,  in 
the  position  of  mediator  between  the  two  parties,  compel 
its'  own  admission  to  the  offices  of  state  .  .  .  Nothing 
shows  so  clearly  the  defencelessness  of  the  clan-nobility 
when  opposed  to  the  united  plebs,  as  the  fact  that  the  fun- 
damental principle  of  the  exclusive  party  —  the  invalidity 
of  marriage  between  patricians  and  plebeians  —  fell  at  the 
first  blow  scarcely  four  years  after  the  decemviral  revolu- 
tion" (10). 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION,  20a 

Through  this  great  political  change,  the  classic  soci- 
eties in  their  corporate  character  passed  from  the  ancient 
family  basis  to  the  basis  of  property.  The  road  to  legal 
membership  in  the  State  lay  no  longer  through  the  chan- 
nel of  ancient  descent,  nor  of  adoption  or  marriage  into 
the  noble  families.  Noble  descent,  although  a  much  prized 
social  honor,  no  longer  conferred  special  privileges.  The 
legal  right  of  every  man  to  a  voice  in  public  affairs  was 
recognized  —  provided  that  he  were  free,  and  had  prop- 
erty of  a  certain  value.  Sometimes  the  franchise  was  not 
limited  by  a  property  qualification.  The  practice  was  not 
uniform.*  But  there  was  always  a  restriction  of  this 
kind  upon  the  right  to  hold  important  offices.  Although 
government  was  therefore  still  in  the  hands  of  the  upper 
class,  this  change  was  in  reality  a  great  political  step  in 
advance  of  earlier  practice.  The  State  in  something  like 
its  modern  form  appeared. 

§  123. —  It  should  be  emphasized  that  the  govern- 
ments wherein  the  new  aristocracy  won  a  place  beside  the 
old  nobility  were  democratic  in  form  but  not  in  substance. 
The  Greek  and  Roman  republics  were  not  popular,  demo- 
cratic republics  in  the  modern  sense.  Mr.  Mahaffy  has 
well  said  that  the  Greek  democracies  were  one  and  all 
slaveholding  democracies,  and  that  for  each  freeman  with 
a  vote  there  were  at  least  three  or  four  slaves  (11) ;  and  it 
is  not  too  much  to  declare,  with  Merivale,  that  "at  no 
period  within  the  sphere  of  historic  records  was  the  com- 
monwealth of  Eome  anything  but  an  oligarchy  of  war- 
riors and  slaveholders"  (12). 

§  124. —  Not  only  did  the  classic  peoples  rise  out  of 
barbarism,  and  form  relatively  stable  communities  in 
possession  of  numerous  arts;  they  assimilated  the  results 
of  oriental  culture;  and  made  invaluable  contributions  of 
their  own  to  human  progress.  As  Greece  and  Rome  grad- 
ually brought  the  civilized  world  within  the  scope  of  their 
influence  and  power,  all  around  the  shores  of  the  Mediter- 

*  We  can  state  the  facts  only  in  the  most  general  form  here. 


204  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ranean  and  far  inland,  the  impediments  to  a  broader 
social  intercourse,  hitherto  raised  by  local  speech,  local 
custom,  local  religion,  and  local  habits  of  thought,  were 
swept  away.  Throughout  the  vast  world  thus  gathered 
under  a  single  government  the  rights  of  citizenship  were 
conferred  upon  large  and  increasing  numbers  without  re- 
gard to  descent,  and  sometimes  without  reference  to  prop- 
erty. In  contrast  with  the  older  tribal  and  national  nar- 
rowness, how  stimulating  it  is  to  hear  Paul  the  apostle,  in 
a  far-off  province  of  the  Roman  Empire,  stay  the  hand  of 
authority  by  uttering  the  magic  formula :  "I  am  a  Roman 
citizen!" 

§  125. —  But  this  great  circle  of  communities  waxed 
and  waned  like  the  oriental  peoples.  In  the  later,  as  in 
the  earlier,  civilization  the  abuses  of  cleavage  eventually 
outweighed  its  benefits;  and  the  pressure  of  militant  in- 
vaders became  irresistible.  The  soil  was  gathered  up  in 
the  hands  of  a  landowning  class  (13) ;  and  since  all  avail- 
able territory  in  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa  had  been  con- 
quered  and  occupied,  there  was  no  further  opportunity 
for  colonizing  unappropriated  lands  with  poor  men.  The 
continents  were,  in  fact,  full  of  savage  and  barbarian 
tribes,  many  of  whom  were  themselves  restlessly  in  search 
of  new  homes ;  and  the  declining  military  power  of  Rome 
was  unequal  to  the  farther  extension  of  her  empire. 

It  is  true  that  the  territory  embraced  in  classic  civil- 
ization was  not  fully  settled  nor  improved.  The  popula- 
tion was  no  more  overcrowded  with  reference  to  the  stand- 
ing room  and  natural  resources  afforded  by  the  land  than 
the  population  of  modern  countries.  But,  like  modern 
countries,  and  like  ancient  Israel  and  her  neighbors,  the 
classic  world  held  its  unused  soil  at  a  price.  Whoever 
wanted  to  invest  capital  in  projects  of  any  kind  had  first 
to  pay  into  private  hands  either  a  lump  sum,  or  an  annual 
rent,  for  bare  location ;  and  then  submit  to  annual  public 
taxation.  The  public  revenue  system,  having  come  down 
from  the  earlier,  nomadic  period  of  social  development, 
was  ill  adjusted  to  the  needs  of  settled  society.    The  man 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION.  206- 

who  held  land  out  of  use  at  a  price  was  taxed  little  or  noth- 
ing ;  and  was  thus  encouraged  to  speculate  in  unused  nat- 
ural opportunities.  The  man  who  wished  to  invest  capi- 
tal in  planting  the  ground,  or  in  putting  up  dwelling 
houses  and  stores,  was  discouraged  by  the  same  policy.  If 
a  heavy  tax  had  been  resting  upon  land  values,  it  would 
have  been  impossible  for  luxurious  Roman  senators  and 
Athenian  aristocrats  to  hold  land  out  of  use;  while  the 
expenses  confronting  the  investment  of  capital  would  have 
been  greatly  reduced. 

But  no  such  change  was  made,  nor  even  thought  of. 
The  multiplying  population  stived  and  sweltered,  without 
secure  means  of  a  livelihood,  without  property,  and  conse- 
quently without  patriotism.  In  the  last  half  of  the  second 
century  before  Christ,  the  Gracchi  met  death  at  the  hands 
of  the  upper  classes  in  a  poor  but  sincere  attempt  to  rem- 
edy the  economic  situation;  and  they  stand  for  perhaps 
the  greatest  wisdom  that  classic  civilization  ever  brought 
to  bear  upon  the  social  problem.  "Soldiers  of  Italy !'  cried 
Tiberius  Gracchus,  "You  are  called  lords  of  the  earth ;  but 
you  do  not  possess  a  single  clod  to  call  your  own!" 

In  the  age  of  the  Gracchi,  indeed,  the  Roman  army 
had  already  entered  upon  that  course  of  deterioration 
which  was  at  last  to  prove  fatal  to  Rome  herself.  The  sup 
ply  of  patriotic  soldiers  —  men  with  spirit  to  defend  their 
country  —  was  running  short;  and  the  ranks  were  being 
filled  up  with  slaves,  poverty  stricken  freemen,  and  bar- 
barians. The  latter  element  grew  more  and  more  in  num- 
bers, until  at  last  Rome  defended  herself  against  the  bar- 
barians by  hiring  barbarians  to  fight  her  battles  against 
their  own  brothers.  What  wonder  is  it  that  the  barbar- 
ians at  length  overwhelmed  the  classic  world  in  a  mighty 
flood,  and  subverted  the  second  great  civilization  in  the 
world's  history? 

At  this  period  all  the  moral  evils  with  which  the 
prophets  of  Israel  had  contended  were  prevalent.  Every- 
where the  multiplying  lower  class  was  partly  in  personal 
bondage  and  partly  free.     But  the  upper  class  monopo- 


206  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

lized  the  earth;  and  whether  the  members  of  the  lower 
class  were  free  in  form  or  not,  they  were  nowhere  free  in 
fact.  They  lived  in  a  world  which  was  itself  the  prop- 
erty of  a  class;  and  their  immediate  bodily  needs  forced 
them  to  compete  with  each  other  for  the  economic  favor  of 
that  class.  Between  the  upper  and  nether  millstones  of 
taxation  and  monopoly,  the  lower  classes  were  in  misery. 
Their  labor  produced  wealth  of  all  kinds;  but  they  con- 
sumed little  of  their  own  products.  As  in  oriental  civili- 
zation and  in  present  day  society,  this  appropriated  labor 
was  more  and  more  diverted  from  the  production  of  capi- 
tal and  useful  wealth  to  the  production  of  luxury  for  the 
upper  class.  Labor  is  diverted  from  capital  to  luxury  in 
the  proportion  that  it  becomes  unprofitable  to  invest  new 
<!apital  in  business.  And  as  luxury  and  poverty  increase, 
the  evil  personal  conduct  growing  directly  out  of  these 
conditions  also  increases.  The  sins  of  poverty  and  the  sins 
of  wealth  come  hand  in  hand. 

It  is  as  idle  to  charge  the  decline  and  fall  of  classic 
civilization  to  individual  moral  decay  as  to  charge  the  like 
in  the  case  of  oriental  civilization,  or  to  say  that  the  evils 
of  the  primitive  struggle  for  existence  w^ere  due  to  the  lack 
of  gentleness  and  good  will.  Many  people,  however,  are 
still  of  the  ancient  persuasion.  "The  collapse  of  the  Ro- 
man power  through  loss  of  moral  virility,"  says  Professor 
Peabody,  "is  the  most  solemn  proof  which  history  pro- 
vides that  righteousness  alone  exalteth  a  people'*  (14). 
But  if  our  contention  is  worth  anything,  the  decline  of 
Rome  was  itself  the  cause,  not  the  effect,  of  evil  conduct. 
If  Rome  collapsed  because  of  the  unrighteousness  of  her 
people,  it  follows  that  she  must  previously  have  risen  as  a 
consequence  of  righteousness.  But  if  we  are  to  speak 
scientifically  of  personal  conduct  as  connected  with  social 
progress  and  social  decline,  we  must  criticise  our  cate- 
gories more  carefully,  and  revise  our  definitions. 

§  126. —  In  this  declining  civilization,  with  its  inter- 
nal and  external  troubles,  a  new  institution  gradually 
arose — the  Christian  Church.   Christianity  took  its  rise  on 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION.  207 

the  soil  of  the  oriental  world  in  a  territory  then  ruled  by 
Eome  —  the  little  country  of  Judea,  which  was  all  that 
remained  of  the  old  national  kingdom  of  Israel.  Striking 
its  roots  into  the  soil  of  the  Jewish  faith,  and  centering 
about  the  person  of  Jesus  the  prophet  of  Nazareth,  the 
new  religion  presently  spread  throughout  the  classic 
world. 

§  127. —  At  the  opening  of  the  Christian  era  both  up- 
per and  lower  classes  among  the  Jews  were  anxiously  ex- 
pecting the  king  long  foretold  by  the  prophets.  He  was  to 
be  the  Messiah,  the  annointed,  or  chosen,  of  Yahweh. 
Upon  his  advent  was  to  be  established  the  great  Messianic 
kingdom  —  the  kingdom  of  God,  or  of  Heaven.  The  Mes- 
siah was  to  be  the  earthly  king ;  but  the  real  King  was  to 
be  Yahweh,  god  of  all.  The  glorious  times  of  David  and 
Solomon  were  to  return  with  added  glory.  Jerusalem  was 
to  take  the  place  of  Eome  and  of  old  Babylon  as  the  im- 
perial city  of  the  world.  All  men  were  to  be  subject  to  the 
Jews,  and  to  serve  Yahweh,  the  King  of  heaven  and  earth. 
Disease,  war,  and  famine  were  to  be  abolished.  Eich  Jews 
were  to  become  richer ;  while  the  lower  classes  anticipated 
an  era  of  "righteousness"  and  "justice"  wherein  their  op- 
pressions and  hardships  were  to  cease  (15). 

§  128. —  A  careful  study  of  the  books  of  the  gospel 
seems  to  show  that  the  message  of  Jesus  resolves  itself  un- 
der three  general  heads : 

1 :     The  Proclamation  of  the  Kingdom. 

2 :     The  Characterization  of  the  King. 

3 :     The  Interpretation  of  the  Kingdom. 

§  129. —  By  the  proclamation  of  the  kingdom  Jesus 
connected  his  preaching  with  the  current  hopes  of  his 
race.  This  was  the  earliest  element  of  his  message.  Ac- 
cording to  the  most  primitive  gospel  records,  Jesus  began 
his  public  ministry  with  the  words:  "The  time  is  ful- 
filled ;  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand.  Eepent ;  and 
believe  the  good  news"  (Mark  1:15).  According  to  the 
Matthew-account  his  preaching  opened  with  the  same 
thought :    "Eepent,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand" 


208  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

(Matthew  4:17).  These  phrases,  "kingdom  of  God"  and 
"kingdom  of  heaven/'  are  practically  synonymous;  and 
they  occur  frequently  in  the  reports  of  the  words  of  Jesus. 

§  130. —  In  taking  up  the  second  element  of  this  mes- 
sage—  the  characterization  of  the  Divine  King  —  we 
must  once  more  turn  back  the  pages  of  history.  It  is  a 
commonplace  that  the  predominant  conception  of  deity  in 
the  literature  of  the  Old  Testament  represents  a  much 
harsher  and  more  violent  being  than  the  predominant  con- 
ception in  the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  The  older  lit- 
erature, indeed,  frequently  reflects  the  most  violent  ideas 
of  deity.  But  in  the  later  literature  we  are  conscious  of 
entering  a  different  atmosphere.  In  the  New  Testament  we 
find  the  universal  God  of  love.  Now,  the  newer  concep- 
tion has  become  the  common  property  of  mankind  through 
the  personality  of  Jesus ;  and  in  order  to  begin  to  estimate 
this  element  of  his  preaching  it  is  necessary  to  do  some- 
thing more  than  study  Jesus  himself. 

We  have  learned  that  in  the  earlier  stages  of  social 
evolution  it  is  the  heads  of  families,  the  leaders  of  the 
"fathers'  houses,"  who  alone  constitute  the  legal  element 
in  the  community.  This  is  a  general  sociological  truth. 
The  supremacy  of  fatherhood  in  politics  obtained  through- 
out the  entire  oriental  civilization.  It  was  the  law  at  first 
in  classic  civilization ;  and  it  also  obtained  at  first  among 
the  ancestors  of  our  own  w^estern  peoples.  The  conception 
of  fatherhood  is  at  first  closely  associated  with  the  idea  of 
protection  against  enemies.  It  was  the  fathers  in  early 
days  that  were  the  chief  warriors  and  defenders  of  so- 
ciety. When  they  went  to  war  on  behalf  of  their  families 
and  homes  they  went  in  their  paternal  character.  They 
loved  their  kindred  after  a  fashion;  but  their  love  was 
rough  as  compared  with  what  we  now  understand  by  the 
word;  and  it  could  hardly  be  extended  to  include 
strangers. 

We  have  seen  that  the  ancient  gods  were  developed 
out  of  dead  chiefs  and  clan  leaders ;  and  it  is  not  at  all  re- 
markable, therefore,  that  the  gods  of  early  men  should  be 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION.  209 

represented  as  partaking  of  the  general  character  of  early- 
men  themselves.  Ancient  gods  were  thus  primarily  war 
gods.  Yahweh  was  a  god  of  barbarian  tribes  which  at- 
tacked and  occupied  the  lands  of  other  peoples,  and' which 
were  in  turn  compelled  to  defend  themselves  against  re- 
peated invasions.  Hence,  like  the  deities  of  barbarians  in 
general,  he  was  mostly  thought  of  as  a  god  of  armies,  and 
as  a  god  mighty  in  battle  (Psalm  24).  In  1  Samuel  7:10 
we  read  that  Yahweh  thundered  upon  the  Philistines  (Of. 
1  Samuel  2 :10).  In  Psalm  29 :3  we  read :  "The  god  of 
glory  thundereth."  In  harmony  with  these  conceptions 
we  read  at  greater  length  in  Psalm  18th  as  follows: 
"Then  the  earth  shook  and  trembled.  The  foundations 
also  of  the  mountains  moved  and  were  shaken  because  he 
was  wroth.  There  went  up  a  smoke  out  of  his  nostrils; 
and  fire  out  of  his  mouth  devoured.  Coals  were  kindled 
by  it.  He  bowed  the  heavens  also,  and  came  down;  and 
thick  darkness  was  under  his  feet.  Yahweh  also  thun- 
dered in  the  heavens ;  and  the  Most  High  uttered  his  voice ; 
hailstones  and  coals  of  fire.  He  sent  out  his  arrows,  and 
scattered  them;  yea,  many  lightnings,  and  discomfited 
them.''  The  point  here  is,  that  Yahweh  w^as  principally 
thought  of  in  Old  Testament  times  as  a  strong  and  vio- 
lent god.    In  brief,  theology  reflected  sociology. 

But  we  have  seen  that  society  moved  upward  through 
important  stages  of  evolution  between  the  times  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  New.  The  earlier  system  of  govern- 
ment founded  on  the  family  aristocracy  had  passed  into 
the  modern  system  of  government  founded  on  property 
and  personal  freedom  regardless  of  descent.  No  longer 
monopolized  by  the  "father's  houses,"  government  passed 
out  of  the  period  wherein  the  fathers,  in  their  paternal 
character,  controlled  the  people  and  fought  the  battles  of 
society.  The  State  —  that  is  to  say,  society  in  its  corpor- 
ate capacity  —  moved  out  of  the  personal  stage  of  poli- 
tics into  the  impersonal  stage.  Governmental  activities 
and  political  rights,  although  open  to  fathers,  no  longer 

14 


210  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

pertained  to  fathers  in  their  paternal  character.  A  citi- 
zen did  not  necessarily  belong  to  an  ancient  noble  family. 
When  fathers  went  into  battle,  they  went,  not  in  their 
paternal  character,  but  simply  as  men  under  the  direc- 
tion of  governments  no  longer  monopolized  by  fatherhood. 
The  area  of  peace  was  vaster  than  hitherto.  There  were 
not  so  many  petty  wars.  If  the  conflicts  on  the  frontier 
equalled  or  exceeded  the  conflicts  of  ancient  days,  they 
were  farther  away,  and  the  actual  social  space  within 
which  men  came  into  peaceful  contact  was  greater  than  it 
had  ever  been  before.  These  changes,  although  gradual, 
were  nothing  less  than  revolutionary;  and  their  effect 
upon  social  psychology  was  profound.  Fatherhood  grew 
more  industrial  and  peaceful  in  character.  The  family, 
no  longer  the  main  pillar  of  the  state,  underwent  an  in- 
ternal development  within  the  state  itself.  Love  between 
the  members  of  the  family  increased  as  compared  with  love 
at  earlier  stages  of  progress.  The  ideal  of  fatherhood  was 
no  longer  associated  with  blood,  thunder  and  military 
protection.  It  lost  its  barbarian  ferocity,  and  grew  more 
industrial,  peaceful,  and  lovable.  In  other  words,  the  evo- 
lution of  society  pours  a  wealth  of  new  meaning  into  the 
fact  and  into  the  ideal  of  fatherhood.  All  this  is  a  part  of 
what  came  to  mankind  through  the  classic  civilization; 
and  it  was  the  classic  world  which,  long  before  the  time  of 
Jesus,  extended  itself  around  the  shores  of  the  Mediter- 
ranean, and  included  the  remains  of  Israel  within  the 
mighty  circle  of  its  influence. 

Jesus  was  a  city  man  of  the  humbler  sort,  although 
not  by  any  means  from  the  lowest  levels  of  the  lower  class. 
Up  to  about  the  age  of  thirty,  his  life,  like  that  of  Joseph, 
the  head  of  the  family,  was  occupied  in  the  pursuits  of  in- 
dustry. There  is  no  hint  that  the  rude  currents  of  war 
ever  disturbed  his  home,  and  involved  him  in  the  fiercer 
conflicts  of  men.  The  vast  society  whereof  he  was  a  part 
had  in  his  day  accumulated  a  greater  stock  of  intangible 
capital  in  the  form  of  Peace  than  the  world  had  known 
hitherto.    Like  most  Jewish  boys,  Jesus  had  been  duly  in- 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION.  211 

structed  in  the  idealized  history  of  his  forefathers ;  and  he 
had  early  shown  a  disposition  to  study  the  ancient  his- 
tories and  prophecies  of  his  race.  Doubtless,  too,  he  read 
such  other  scanty  literature  as  came  within  the  range  of 
his  limited  opportunities.  But  mostly  the  literature  of  his 
people  held  his  thought.  The  learning  of  Jesus,  however, 
was  not  like  the  learning  of  the  priests  and  scribes.  He 
read  the  sacred  books  of  his  race  with  the  liberal  eye  of  the 
prophet,  not  with  the  contracted  vision  of  legalistic  priests 
and  scribes.  The  first  and  second  Isaiahs  were  prominent 
among  his  teachers;  and  his  life  and  influence  are  proof 
that  in  him  the  ancient  spirit  of  prophecy,  after  a  sleep  of 
centuries,  at  last  re-awoke,  and  attained  the  crown  of  its 
development.  His  life  and  influence  have,  indeed,  com- 
pletely justified  the  verdict  of  his  contemporaries,  "A 
great  prophet  is  arisen  among  us  "  (Luke  7:16.  Cf.  Gos- 
pels, passim). 

The  psychology  of  prophetism  always  associates  the 
prophet  closely  with  Divinity;  and  it  is  not  strange  that 
after  Jesus  had  connected  his  ideas  with  the  hopes  of  his 
race  by  proclaiming  the  advent  of  the  Divine  Kingdom,  he 
.should  advance  to  the  characterization  of  the  Divine  King, 
the  real  head  of  the  new  polity.  In  the  order  of  time  this 
was  not  the  first  element  of  his  teaching.  In  the  order  of 
logic  and  practical  importance,  however,  it  was  first  and 
fundamental.  The  proclamation  of  the  kingdom  was  in- 
troductory and  subsidiary  to  it. 

On  looking  into  the  sacred  books  of  his  people,  Jesus 
found  that  although  the  predominant  conception  of  Di- 
vinity in  ancient  Israel  was  harsh  and  violent,  Yahweh 
had  been  frequently  spoken  of  as  a  father.  Most  of  these 
references  merely  relate  to  the  Israelites,  either  in  the 
singular  or  in  the  plural,  and  not  to  the  world  at  large.* 
In  2  Samuel  7:14  Yahweh  is  brought  into  personal  rela- 
tion with  King  Solomon  thus :    "I  will  be  his  father,  and 

*Cf.  Hosea  11:  1;  Isaiah  1:  2;  Jeremiah  3:  4;  ibid.,  31:  9; 
Malachr  1:6;  Psalm  2:7;  Psalm  89 :  26,  27 ;  Deuteronomy  1 :  31 ;  ibid., 
5:5;    ibid.,  14:  1;    ibid..  32:  6;    Exodus  4:  22. 


212  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

he  shall  be  my  son."  In  Psalm  103 :13  a  similitude  from 
fatherhood  is  used.  Yahweh  is  there  said  to  pity  those 
that  fear  him  —  not  those  that  do  not  fear  him  —  as  a 
father  pities  his  children.  But  fatherhood  in  connection 
with  ancient  gods  was  mostly  thought  of  in  the  formal, 
corporate,  collective,  impersonal  sense.  The  Israelite  felt 
that  he  was  "a  son  of  Yahweh,"  not  because  he  was  an 
individual  man,  but  because  he  was  an  Israelite.  It  is  the 
custom  of  the  clan  aristocracy  in  the  early  days  of  all  his- 
toric nations  to  connect  themselves  with  the  gods  by  direct 
descent.  Thus,  the  Anglo-Saxon  kings  claimed  to  have 
descended  from  the  god  Woden.  Thus,  the  Moabites  are 
spoken  of  in  Numbers  21:29  as  the  children  of  the  god 
Chemosh :  "Thou  art  undone,  O  people  of  Chemosh.  He 
hath  given  his  sons  as  fugitives,  and  his  daughters  into 
captivity."  It  is  true  that,  so  far  as  Israel  was  concerned, 
Yahweh  was  a  covenant  god,  and  not  a  god  who  had  grown 
up  with  Israel  from  the  beginning.  But  that  would  make 
no  difference.  The  fathers  of  ancient  tribes  were  spoken 
of  as  "our  fathers"  by  outsiders  who  were  adopted  or  mar- 
ried into  these  tribes;  and  foster-parents  are  always  ad- 
dressed under  the  same  forms  as  natural  parents.  On  the 
basis  of  these  facts,  then,  Jesus  had  good  grounds  for 
thinking  of  Yahweh  in  the  paternal  character,  and  for 
speaking  of  him  as  a  father.  But  fatherhood  in  the  mind 
and  the  teaching  of  Jesus  did  not  stand  for  what  father- 
hood represented  in  the  Old  Testament;  and  we  are  now 
coming  closer  to  the  sources  of  his  basic  doctrine. 

The  work  of  the  earlier  prophets,  in  transforming  the 
practical  polytheism  of  Israel  before  the  Exile  into  the 
practical  monotheism  of  post-Exilic  Israel,  made  it  unnec- 
essary for  Jesus  to  put  stress  on  the  doctrine  of  mono- 
theism. This  phase  of  the  doctrine  of  God  was  therefore 
no  characteristic  part  of  the  personal  work  of  Jesus.  He 
quietly  assumed  the  monotheism  which  was  now  an  ofi&cial 
doctrine  of  his  people. 

The  fundamental  element  of  his  preaching  was,  we 
think,  the  product  of  three  considerations :  (a)  Yahweh  the 


CLASSIC  CIVILIZATION.  213 

imperial  god,  as  established  through  earlier  history,  and 
prophetism;  (b)  Yahweh  the  father,  established  in  this 
character  on  the  basis  of  early  tradition,  which  asserts  the 
paternity  of  all  the  gods;  and  (c)  the  ideal  of  fatherhood 
as  transformed  by  social  evolution  between  the  times  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  If  Yahweh  were  the  god 
of  all  mankind,  and  if  he  were  also  a  father,  he  must  be  all 
that  was  novj  implied  in  the  sociology  of  fatherhood.  In 
short,  he  must  be  the  loving  father  of  every  man,  regard- 
less of  nationality  or  descent,  just  as  the  individual  was 
now  admitted  to  political  rights  regardless  of  descent  or 
previous  condition  of  servitude.  The  more  primitive  re- 
ligious thought  of  Israel  had  authoritatively  declared  the 
fatherhood  of  Yahweh.  Nevertheless,  the  leading  idea  of 
him,  as  found  in  the  literature  of  the  Old  Testament,  was 
harsh  and  barbaric.  His  love  was  for  Israel,  and  for  those 
in  Israel  that  feared  him.  Ancient  theology  reflected  an- 
cient sociology.  The  discrepancy  between  the  leading  Old 
Testament  idea  of  Yahweh  as  a  god  of  hosts,  mighty  in 
battle,  and  Yahweh  as  a  father,  worked  upon  the  con- 
sciousness of  Jesus.  There  was  no  sense  of  history  in  his 
day;  and,  preoccupied  with  the  newer  and  more  modern 
social  psychology  of  fatherhood,  the  liberal  genius  of  the 
new  prophet  overleaped  the  discrepancy  in  the  ancient 
doctrines,  and  read  back  into  the  word  "father,"  which 
had  been  applied  to  Yahweh  in  the  days  of  old,  all  the 
wealth  of  new  meaning  which  the  evolution  of  society  had 
poured  into  the  fact  and  the  ideal  of  fatherhood.  In  the 
religion  of  Jesus,  theology  thus  again  reflected  sociology. 
In  brief,  Jesus  brought  theology  down  to  date. 

As  noiselessly  as  a  flower  grows  and  blooms  in  the 
sunshine,  so  the  newer  doctrine  of  God  grew  in  the  mind 
of  Jesus.  There  was  no  sense  of  history  in  his  day;  and 
although  the  loving  father  of  all  mankind,  as  preached  by 
Jesus,  represents  an  advance  over  the  Old  Testament  god 
of  armies,  mighty  in  battle,  yet  Jesus  was  not,  and  could 
not  be,  conscious  of  presenting  a  new  religious  doctrine. 
At  the  most,  he  thought  of  himself  as  emphasizing  an  ele- 


214  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


ment  of  the  divine  character  which,  for  some  reason  that 
he  perhaps  did  not  speculate  about,  had  not  been  presented 
by  the  earlier  prophets.  He  became  completely  possessed 
and  inspired  by  the  conception ;  and  his  favorite  term  for 
the  God  of  heaven  and  earth  was  simply  "Father."  The 
thought  of  the  Old  Testament  god  of  armies,  battles,  and 
thunder  seems  out  of  place  in  the  New  Testament 
writings. 

Thus  theology  develops.  The  line  of  prophetism  runs 
backward  into  the  darkness  of  prehistoric  times.  Affirma- 
tions about  the  gods  are  passed  on  from  generation  to 
generation.  As  historical  development  pours  new  mean- 
ings into  old  terms,  later-coming  prophets  read  these 
meanings  back  into  the  old  terms;  and  theology  is  again 
and  again  brought  down  to  date.  So  far  as  we  are  able  to 
judge,  Jesus  did  not  have  the  slightest  consciousness  that 
he  was  introducing  what  was  practically  a  new  theological 
doctrine;  and  in  the  considerations  here  set  forth  we  see 
the  basis  for  the  paradoxical  fact  that  he  could  proclaim 
a  new  doctrine  under  the  impression  that  it  was  old.  "A 
prophet  is  never  a  repeater  of  commonplaces,"  observes 
Dr.  Bruce,  in  his  work  on  Apologetics.  "When  we  find 
him  affirming  any  new  truth  with  intensity  and  iteration, 
we  may  be  sure  it  is  a  new  truth,  at  least  in  respect  of  the 
amount  of  conviction  with  which  it  is  uttered,  and  the 
connections  of  thought  in  which  it  is  introduced"  (16). 
The  mass  of  the  people  in  the  time  of  Jesus  and  in  later 
ages,  have  unconsciously  shown  by  their  attitude  that  in 
him  they  find  a  doctrine  which  is  not  adequately  expressed 
by  any  earlier  prophet.  His  place  in  history  is,  indeed, 
bound  up  with  his  emphasis  upon  the  loving  fatherhood  of 
a  universal  God.* 

*The  following  sentences  doubtless  well  represent  the  most 
important  phase  of  the  psychology  of  Jesus:  "Father,  the  world 
knew  thee  not,  but  I  knew  thee"  (John  17:  25).  "No  one  knoweth  the 
Father  but  the  Son"  (Matthew  11 :  27).  "No  one  knoweth  who  the  Father 
is,  save  the  Son."  (Luke  10:22).  Jesus  was  plainly  conscious  that  his 
fundamental   idea   of  Divinity  had  never  been  entertained  by  the  world 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  216 

§  131. —  Having  announced  the  advent  of  the  divine 
kingdom,  and  characterized  the  King,  Jesus  proceeded  to 
interpret  the  nature  of  the  kingdom.  Much  of  this  part 
of  his  teaching  may  be  regarded  as  a  deduction  from  his 
doctrine  of  the  universal  divine  fatherhood.  But  just  as 
his  doctrine  of  God  reflected  the  sociology  of  his  age,  so 
his  doctrine  of  the  kingdom  is  plainly,  if  unconsciously, 
an  outgrowth  of  the  social  conditions  about  him.  The 
whole  teaching  of  Jesus  is  so  inextricably  bound  up  with 
itself,  and  with  the  conditions  of  his  age,  that  it  is  hard  to 
discriminate  justly. 

The  Greeks  and  Komans,  by  breaking  up  the  limita- 
tions of  tribalism  and  nationality,  and  gathering  men  into 
a  larger  social  aggregate  than  the  world  had  ever  seen 
before,  furnished  a  dramatic  suggestion  of  the  brother- 
hood of  all  men.  Accordingly,  whether  we  are  to  regard 
Jesus'  interpretation  of  the  kingdom  as  a  deduction  from 
the  newer  doctrine  of  the  universal  fatherhood  of  God,  or 
as  being  suggested  by  social  conditions,  or  as  partly 
a    development    from    both,    it    is    not    strange   to    find 

at  large.  Yet,  for  the  reasons  given  in  the  text,  his  doctrine  of  the 
divine  fatherhood  could  not  present  itself  to  him  save  as  expressing 
an  ancient  fact.  He  may  have  wondered  why  no  earlier  man  had  appre- 
hended the  Divine  as  he  did ;  but  the  lack  of  historical  and  social  science 
in  his  day  shut  out  all  possibility  of  explanation;  and  he  never  publicly 
addressed  himself  to  this  problem.  It  would  be  interesting  to  know  what 
his  theory  of  the  fact  was.  Probably  it  would  relate  itself  in  some  way 
to  his  apprehension  of  the  Messianic  office. 

As  to  the  validity  of  the  psychology  of  Jesus  in  reference  to  objective 
reality,  we  are  not  here  concerned  to  inquire. 

In  explaining  Jesus'  idea  of  God,  there  is  no  necessity  for  going 
outside  the  bounds  of  history  as  recovered  by  modern  scientific  scholar- 
ship. It  is  no  explanation  of  the  central  feature  of  the  psychology  of 
Jesus  to  say  that  he  was  a  "unique  religious  genius,"  or  that  his  doc- 
trine of  divinity  was  the  issue  of  "revelation."  The  conventional  appre- 
hension of  Jesus  is  most  unsatisfactory.  The  mystical  Christology  of 
the  churches,  at  the  one  extreme,  and  the  equally  crass  rationalism  of 
scholars  like  Renan,  at  the  other,  are  obsolescent.  When  the  higher 
criticism  of  the  Old  Testament  is  completed,  we  shall  see  an  evolution  of 
New  Testament  criticism  which  will,  for  the  first  time,  supply  a  satis- 
factory account  of  Jesus. 


216  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

Jesus  teaching  the  doctrine  of  universal  human  broth- 
erhood. If  God  were  the  loving  Father  of  all,  then  all  men 
were  neighbors  and  brothers  regardless  of  tribalism  and 
nationality. 

We  have  seen  that  the  admission  of  the  individual  to 
political  rights,  regardless  of  descent  or  of  any  previous 
condition  of  servitude,  had  broken  the  power  of  the  an- 
cient family  nobility.  This  was  a  tremendous  revolution 
over  the  politics  which  had  prevailed  in  all  societies  from 
the  dawn  of  history.  Its  effect  on  the  social  mind  was  pro- 
foundly democratic.  The  lower  classes  of  the  people  saw 
persons  from  their  own  ranks  rising  to  positions  of  social 
and  political  importance,  and  even  into  the  councils  of 
nobles,  kings,  and  emperors.  Although  the  suffrage  was 
indeed  usually  hedged  about  with  considerable  property 
qualifications,  the  new  system,  as  compared  with  the  older 
system  of  descent,  was  only  a  step  from  the  admission  of 
all  men  to  political  rights  on  the  basis  of  manhood  alone. 
And  this  made  the  humble  folk  look  up  with  new  unrest 
and  new  hope.  The  rights  of  the  individual  had  been,  so 
to  speak,  legally  suggested.  Nevertheless,  the  rights  of 
the  individual  were  not  i  secured  unless  he  were  wealthy. 
The  situation  was  paradoxical.  The  individual  in  the  ab- 
stract had  rights;  but  only  some  individuals  got  rights  in 
the  concrete. 

This  phase  of  the  situation  was  also  reflected  in  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  If  all  men  were  brothers,  and  the  sons 
of  a  common  Father,  it  must  follow  that  all  had  a  right  to 
the  same  consideration,  even  the  least  of  the  little  ones. 
But  the  sociology  of  human  brotherhood  was  never  fully 
taught  by  Jesus.  His  relation  to  the  political  phase  of 
human  life,  through  which  alone  the  rights  of  the  indi- 
vidual are  secured,  is  indefinite,  and  is  well  expressed  by 
his  famous  injunction  to  "render  unto  Caesar  the  things 
that  are  Caesar's''  (Mark  12:17).  He  seems  to  have 
avoided  a  delicate  subject  by  a  cleverly  politic  sentiment. 
Jesus  did  not  press  the  point.  Perhaps  the  idea  of  man- 
hood suffrage  never  occurred  to  him  as  a  practicable  thing. 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  217 

If  he  had  thought  it  necessary  to  his  interpretation  of  the 
kingdom,  he  would  probably  have  said  so,  for  his  attitude 
toward  other  matters  proves  that  he  did  not  lack  courage. 

The  doctrines  of  human  brotherhood  and  human 
rights  found  practical  expression  in  the  so-called  "golden 
rule,"  which  had  been  previously  formulated  by  the  Jew- 
ish teacher  Hillel  and  the  Chinese  teacher  Confucius. 
"Whatsoever  ye  would  that  men  should  do  unto  you,  even 
so  do  ye  also  unto  them;  for  this  is  the  law  and  the 
prophets"  (Matthew  7 :12.  Cf.  ibid.,  22 :40).  According  to 
Jesus,  the  golden  rule  summarizes  the  secular  aspect  of 
the  kingdom. 

In  his  interpretation  of  the  kingdom  Jesus  comes  to 
close  quarters  with  the  vital  subject  of  cleavage.  In  his 
treatment  of  the  relations  between  upper  and  lower 
classes,  and  in  his  implied  treatment  of  the  subject  of 
property,  he  advances  no  new  doctrine,  and  echoes  the 
cry  of  the  older  prophets.  He  approaches  the  social  prob- 
lem in  the  character  of  an  individualist ;  and  no  straining 
of  points  can  extract  a  properly  social-organic  doctrine 
from  his  teaching.  Certainly  we  do  not  find  it  in  his  con- 
ception of  human  brotherhood.  He  treats  the  subject  of 
personal  relations,  righteousness,  and  justice,  not  from 
the  cosmic  standpoint,  but  from  the  standpoint  of  individ- 
ualism. "Woe  unto  you  that  are  rich,  and  you  that  are 
full!"  he  cries,  denouncing  the  upper  class  indiscrimi- 
nately (Luke  6 :24,  25).  On  the  other  hand,  he  commends 
the  lower  class  in  like  terms:  "Blessed  are  ye  poor, 
for  yours  is  the  kingdom"  (Luke  6:20).  It  is  true 
that  in  Matthew  5:3  the  saying  about  the  poor  is 
etherealized  into  "Blessed  are  the  poor  in  spirit."  But 
whatever  we  do  with  the  saying  in  Matthew,  the  ma- 
terialistic edition  in  Luke  remains;  and  it  corresponds 
with  much  of  the  teaching  preserved  in  the  three-fold 
synoptic  record  upon  which  we  depend  largely  (but  not 
wholly)  for  our  conceptions  of  Jesus.  According  to  Luke 
18 :  24,  25,  Jesus  declares  that  they  who  are  wealthy  shall 
hardly  become  members  of  the  kingdom,  and  that  it  is 


218  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

easier  for  a  camel  to  go  through  a  "needle's  eje"  than  for  a 
rich  man  to  enter  the  kingdom.  According  to  Matthew  23 
and  Luke  20 :46,  47,  the  scribes  and  pharisees  are  de- 
nounced as  the  head  and  center  of  the  upper  class,  de- 
vouring widows'  houses,  and  neglecting  the  weightier  mat- 
ters of  the  law  —  judgment,  mercy,  and  good  faith.  This 
reminds  us  of  the  words  of  the  prophets  Isaiah  and  Micah, 
in  which  they  pronounce  woe  upon  those  who  add  house  to 
house  and  field  to  field,  and  sacrifice  to  Yahweh  but  neg- 
lect mercy.  It  is  plain  that  Jesus'  interpretation  of  the 
kingdom  had  little  sympathy  with  the  politico-material 
hopes  of  the  upper  classes.  The  trend  of  his  preaching,  as 
indicated  by  the  quotations  just  made,  favored  the  lower 
social  stratum  as  against  the  upper  —  not,  indeed,  by  any 
definite  program,  but  in  its  general  tendency,  after  the 
manner  of  older  prophets. 

Consistently  with  this,  we  read,  in  Mark  12 :37,  that 
the  "common  people,"  or  the  "great  multitude,"  heard  him 
gladly.  And,  of  course,  the  upper  class  repaid  his  hos- 
tility with  interest.  In  Luke  19  :47,  48  we  read :  "And  he 
was  teaching  daily  in  the  temple.  And  the  chief  priests 
and  scribes  and  principal  men  of  the  people  sought  to  de- 
stroy him ;  but  they  could  not  find  what  they  might  do,  for 
the  people  all  hung  upon  him  listening"  (Of.  Luke  20:19). 
In  John  7 :48,  49  the  pharisees  inquire :  "Hath  any  of  the 
rulers  believed  on  him,  or  of  the  pharisees?  But  this  mul- 
titude [which  follows  him]  which  knoweth  not  the 
[Mosaic]  law  are  accursed."  There  are  exceptions  to  most 
rules ;  and  Jesus  found  a  few  friends  among  the  well-to-do. 
But,  on  the  whole,  the  upper  class  was  against  him;  and 
the  force  of  its  opposition  steadily  increased. 

Many  people  in  modern  times  have  thought  that  Jesus 
either  expressly  or  impliedly  favored  some  positive  scheme 
of  organic  reform,  such  as  socialism,  or  communism.  But 
the  attempt  to  extract  a  social  program  from  the  gospel 
records  is  unsuccessful.  The  gospels  are  saturated  with 
individualism.  The  times  of  Jesus  could  not  produce  a 
man  with  a  social  program.     The  view  that  he  had  some 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  21^ 

organic  measure  in  reserve  misunderstands  Jesus  no  less 
than  did  the  popular  view  which,  in  his  own  day,  regarded 
him  as  a  candidate  for  the  throne  of  Israel  (John  6:15; 
Matthew  20:  21).* 

§  132. —  Jesus'  thought  about  himself  seems,  on  the 
whole,  to  have  been  kept  in  the  background.  The  ideal- 
izing book  of  John  represents  him  as  declaring  his  Mes- 
siahship  to  a  Samaritan  woman  early  in  his  ministry.  But 
the  synoptics  do  not  support  this.  His  idea  about  himself 
was  evidently  subsidiary  in  his  own  thought;  and  it  must 
have  been  so  on  the  basis  of  any  such  message  as  that  to 
which  the  synoptics  bear  common  witness.  His  humble 
countrymen  were  attracted  by  his  proclamation  of  the 
kingdom,  his  delineation  of  the  King,  and  his  interpreta- 
tion of  the  kingdom  itself.  They  did  not  come  out  to  hear 
him  talk  about  his  own  person.  It  was  not  until  after  his 
execution  that  the  legalistic  idea  of  his  person,  as  repre- 
sented by  the  apostle  Paul,  took  root  in  men's  minds.    We 

*  It  is  a  hopeless  task  to  try  to  understand  Jesus  apart  from  his 
environment.  We  heartily  endorse  the  judgment  of  Professor  Lobstein, 
as  expressed  in  the  following  passage  taken  from  his  recent  work  on  Prot- 
estant dogmatics:  "To  isolate  the  Christ  from  the  general  evolution  of 
humanity  —  is  not  that  to  place  him  outside  of  humanity  itself?  Is  not 
that  to  condemn  him  and  never  to  comprehend  him?"  Lobstein^  Intro- 
duction to  Protestant  Dogmatics  (Trans,  by  A.  M.  Smith,  University  of 
Chicago  Press,  1903),  p.  263.  Probably  Professor  Lobstein  would  not 
endorse  all  of  our  positions  in  this  connection.  But  the  passage  quoted 
is  profoundly  significant. 

There  is  pressing  necessity  for  general  treatment  of  religious  evo- 
lution in  terms  of  modern  thought.  This  has  been  accomplished  only 
in  part  by  historical  criticism  of  our  sacred  literature.  If  plans  do  not 
miscarry,  the  treatment  of  the  subject  as  found  in  the  present  work 
is  to  be  expanded  into  a  larger  volume  entitled.  The  Psychology  of  the 
Prophets:  A  Study  in  the  Development  of  Religion  as  Illustrated  in 
the  History  of  Israel  and  Christianity.  The  proposed  work  will  under- 
take to  exhibit  in  detail  the  sociology  of  religion.  Men  generally  have 
yet  to  learn  that  it  is  possible  to  treat  the  subject  in  a  scientific  way 
without  impugning  religion  itself.  Religious  reality  lies  in  the  absolute 
content  of  the  so  called  "finite  facts ;"  and  the  religious  interpretation  of 
life  must  be  susceptible  of  expression  within  the  terms  of  any  propo- 
sition about  life  that  can  be  laid  down  and  proved  scientifically. 


;220  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

cajinot  imagine  the  historical  Jesus  preaching  "Christ  and 
him  crucified/'  and  teaching  that  salvation  came  through 
faith  in  his  name.  This  was  a  later  and  a  necessary  form 
of  Christianity.  Jesus,  however,  was  undoubtedly  con- 
vinced of  his  own  unique  relation  to  God.  We  have  seen 
that  he  put  a  moral-spiritual  interpretation  upon  the 
kingdom  instead  of  the  politico-material  construction  fa- 
vored by  the  mass  of  the  people  in  every  social  station.  In 
the  same  way,  he  regarded  himself,  not  as  a  political  King, 
but  as  the  suffering  servant  of  Yahweh ;  and  the  literature 
of  Israel  gave  no  small  warrant  for  this.  His  view  of  the 
Messianic  character  was  plainly  contrary  to  that  held  by 
most  of  his  countrymen ;  his  immediate  disciples  were  not 
educated  up  to  his  view  in  his  lifetime;  and  the  diverg- 
ence between  the  two  conceptions  became  painfully  appar- 
ent at  the  last,  when  even  the  common  people  lost  faith  in 
him.* 

§  133. —  The  preaching  of  Jesus  evidently  drew  the 
public  attention  that  he  desired.  Probably  there  would 
have  been  no  upper-class  opposition  to  him  if  he  had  sim- 
ply confined  himself  to  theology.  But  his  treatment  of  the 
kingdom  on  the  secular  side,  especially  as  it  touched  the 
delicate  question  of  cleavage,  was  too  much  for  the  temper 
of  the  aristocrats.  It  was  the  grandees  of  the  higher  social 
stratum  that  plotted  his  death.  It  was  the  sanhedrim,  the 
legal  citadel  of  Jewish  aristocracy  and  monopoly,  that 
condemned  him. 

§  134. —  A  short  time  after  his  execution,  a  few  of  the 
disciples  of  Jesus  became  convinced  that  he  had  risen  from 
the  dead;  and  that  in  the  character  of  the  long-expected 
Messiah,   he   would   presently  return   on   the  clouds   of 

*  That  the  personality  of  Jesus  was  an  important  element  in  his 
influence,  not  to  be  overlooked  in  an  exhaustive  scientific  study  of  the 
impression  that  he  has  made  on  the  world,  will  be  readily  admitted.  The 
psychology  of  hero-worship,  however,  has  not  been  given  the  attention 
it  deserves.  The  subject  of  personal  relations  in  respect  of  leadership 
and  discipleship  has  not  been  fully  worked  out;  and  we  must  pass  over 
this  item  along  with  many  others. 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  221 

heaven  to  usher  in  the  Golden  Age.*  This  view  was  pro- 
claimed by  certain  of  the  humble  disciples  and  followers 
of  Jesus,  who  urged  the  Jews  to  accept  him  as  the  Mes- 
siah. If  the  Gentiles  would  participate  in  the  felicities  of 
the  Golden  Age,  they  must  first  be  circumcised  and  be- 
come Jews. 

In  considering  the  early  history  of  Christianity,  we^ 
must  bear  in  mind  that  the  terrible  economic  oppression 
of  the  vast  lower  class  was  manifest  everywhere;  and  that 
the  earlier  disciples  of  Jesus  were  drawn  mostly  from  the 
lower  class.  In  preaching  the  resurrection  and  Messiah- 
ship  of  Jesus,  and  his  prompt  return  on  the  clouds  to  es- 
tablish the  Golden  Age,  the  disciples  thought  they  had  a 
remedy  for  the  troubles  of  the  times.  They  succeeded  in 
raising  a  disturbance  on  the  streets  of  Jerusalem,  and  in 
converting  a  few  Jew^s  to  their  way  of  thinking.  But  in 
view  of  subsequent  history,  it  is  plain  that  Jewish  Chris- 
tianity could  not  have  become  a  world-religion.  The  his- 
torical career  of  Christianity  has  been  a  Gentile,  not  a 
Jewish,  career.  The  Jews  have  never  accepted  Jesus  as. 
the  Messiah ;  and  it  is  a  very  significant  fact  that  the  orig- 
inal disciples  of  Jesus,  who  had  been  most  with  him,  did 
not  succeed  in  their  enterprise. 

§  135. —  It  was  not  Jewish  Christianity,  then,  that 
triumphed.  The  great  Gentile  world  outside  of  Judaism 
was  brought  to  Christianity,  not  by  the  preaching  of  the 
original  disciples  of  Jesus,  but  by  Paul,  "the  apostle  to  the 
Gentiles,"  as  he  is  indeed  rightly  called. 

Paul  was  a  Jew  by  birth  and  education;  and  he  at 
first  bore  an  active  part  in  the  persecution  of  the  Jewish 
Christians.  His  life  and  letters  reveal  a  man  who  could 
have  done  a  thing  of  this  kind  only  as  a  result  of  the  most 
intense  conviction.  He  had  been  trying  to  practice  right- 
eousness, and  escape  the  chill  underworld  of  "death,"  by 
the  strictest  adherence  to  "the  law  of  Moses"  as  elaborated 

*  It  seems  impossible  at  this  point  for  us  to  give  the  same  render- 
ing of  the  history  as  that  which  is  found  in  the  gospel  accounts. 


222  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

by  Judaism.  His  contact  with  the  Jewish  Christian  move- 
ment, in  the  character  of  persecutor,  "breathing  out 
threatenings  and  slaughter,'^  seems  to  have  brought  to  a 
sudden  culmination  a  process  that  had  been  going  for- 
ward in  his  mind  (Cf.  Romans  7).  This  he  could  only  in- 
terpret, after  the  habit  of  his  age,  as  a  supernatural  turn- 
ing about.  Paul  was  a  man  given  to  visions  and  revela- 
tions, whether  in  the  body  or  out  of  the  body  he  could  not 
tell ;  and  the  risen  Jesus,  he  thought,  appeared  to  him  in  a 
vision  as  he  had  appeared  to  the  earlier  disciples. 

§  136. —  It  became  apparent  to  Paul  that  the  earlier 
system  of  righteousness  by  works  imposed  upon  men  a 
greater  burden  than  they  could  bear ;  that  Jesus  had  come 
as  the  suffering  Messiah,  or  Christ,  to  do  away  with  the 
law  of  Moses  forever  by  his  sacrificial  death;  and  that 
righteousness  and  justification  were  consequently  to  be 
attained  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  and  practice  of  his  teach- 
ings rather  than  through  the  mechanical  works  of  the  law. 
As  a  consequence  of  his  apprehension  of  Jesus,  Paul  de- 
clared that  physical  circumcision,  the  symbol  of  Judaism 
and  the  law,  was  abolished;  and  that  the  entire  Gentile 
world  might  now  become  a  part  of  the  spiritual  Israel  by 
circumcision  of  the  heart.  Paul's  liberal  attitude  with 
reference  to  the  law  of  Moses  was  not  peculiar  to  himself. 
We  know  now  that  the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion  were  di- 
vided into  two  parties,  whereof  one  was  liberal,  and  re- 
jected the  rite  of  circumcision  and  other  ceremonies  (17). 
Liberal  Judaism,  however,  did  not,  like  Paul,  have  Jesus 
behind  it ;  and  it  was  the  genius  of  Paul  that  incorporated 
this  Jewish  liberalism  into  Christianity.  As  might  be  ex- 
pected, Paul's  ideas  in  their  external  aspect  are  some- 
what burdened  with  many  of  the  absurdities  of  primitive 
thought ;  but  their  substance  is  philosophically  sound. 

In  their  essentials  there  was  no  difference  between 
Paulist  Christianity  and  the  Jewish  Christianity  of  the 
original  disciples;  but  Paul's  expression  of  Christianity 


t 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  223 

was  superior  to  that  of  the  original  disciples,  and  more 
accurately  represents  the  spirit  of  Jesus  himself.* 

In  their  external  machinery,  especially  in  regard  to 
the  rite  of  circumcision,  Paulinism  and  Jewish  Christian- 
ity were,  however,  in  conflict.  The  sound  of  this  conflict 
reverberates  in  the  letters  of  Paul ;  but  presently  his  form 
of  the  gospel  triumphed  in  the  great  Gentile  world.  After 
he  had  accomplished  his  work,  two  of  the  foremost  of 
Jesus'  original  disciples  left  the  oriental  world  and  their 
exclusive  mission  to  the  Jews,  and  came  over  into  the  cen- 
ter of  classic  civilization.  John  at  Ephesus,  and  Peter  at 
Kome,  entered  into  the  labors  of  him  they  had  at  first  op- 
posed. This  movement  is  a  typical  manifestation  of  hu- 
man nature;  and  it  signifies  the  early  closure  of  the  con- 
troversy. In  later  years,  when  the  opposition  between  the 
two  parties  had  subsided,  the  first  history  of  the  Christian 
Church  was  written.  In  that  book,  which  is  known  as 
^The  Acts  of  the  Apostles,"  Peter  appears  as  an  early  lib- 
eral, being  converted  by  a  vision  of  a  great  sheet  let  down 
from  heaven ;  and  the  Paul  of  the  Acts  is  a  very  different 
man  from  the  same  person  as  he  appears  in  his  own  letters. 
This  difference,  however,  is  to  be  accounted  for,  not  as  the 
issue  of  a  deliberate  "tendency,''  as  not  a  few  modern 
scholars  have  claimed,  but  as  a  result  of  the  changed 
standpoint  of  the  more  harmonious  Christian  times  in 
which  the  book  of  Acts  was  put  into  its  present  shape. 
This  may  be  otherwise  expressed  by  saying  that  Acts  is 
true  in  spirit,  but  not  in  letter.  It  is  a  monument,  not  to 
early  Christian  discord,  but  to  early  Christian  har- 
mony (18). 

§  137. —  And  now  we  come  to  what  is,  in  the  present 
connection,  the  most  delicate  and  vitally  important  point 
in  the  rise  of  Christianity.  We  saw  that  the  struggle  of 
the  Old  Testament  prophets  to  solve  the  social  problem  is- 
sued, not  in  social  reform,  but  in  the  old  social  cleavage. 

*  Some  scholars  have  regarded  Paul  as  the  real  founder  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  Jesus  as  a  much  smaller  man  than  the  apostle  to  the  Gentiles ; 
but  this,  we  think,  is  a  critical  aberration. 


224  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

In  the  same  way,  the  efforts  of  the  New  Testament  proph- 
ets were  at  length  frustrated  on  the  phenomenal,  or  secu- 
lar, side.  We  shall  now  examine  how  Christianity  articu- 
lated itself  with  cleavage,  and  became  a  state  institution,, 
differing  not  in  its  externals  from  any  other  state  religion. 
Passing  from  the  Jesus  of  the  Synoptics  to  Paul,  the 
student  of  cleavage  is  at  once  conscious  of  a  changed  at- 
mosphere in  w^hich  a  sociological  barometer  indicates  the 
inevitable  transformation.  Paul  concreted  Christianity 
as  a  movement  in  history ;  but,  paradoxically,  the  demand 
for  righteousness  becomes  more  abstract  in  him  than  in 
Jesus.  Jesus  instinctively  arrayed  the  lower  class  against 
the  upper;  and  the  upper  class  responded  by  putting  him 
to  death.  But  in  Paul  we  note  the  absence  of  that  strong 
hostility  against  the  upper  class  which  is  manifest  in 
Jesus.  Paul  does  not  go  about  crying,  "Woe  unto  you 
rich!''  and,  "Blessed  are  you  poor!''  and,  "A  rich  man 
shall  hardly  enter  the  kingdom!"  Paul  can  make  his  way 
anywhere  in  the  Koman  world  without  setting  the  classes 
against  each  other.  Could  a  gospel,  he  argued,  which  pro- 
claimed the  brotherhood  of  all  men  bar  out  the  well-to-do 
and  the  rich  if  they  chose  to  come  in?  It  is  true  that 
Christianity,  even  as  represented  by  the  courtly  Paul,  ap- 
pealed at  first  with  vastly  more  force  and  success  to 
the  lower  class  than  to  the  upper.  A  gospel  which 
promised  the  speedy  return  from  heaven  of  a  Christ 
who  should  avenge  his  own  elect,  and  which  guar- 
anteed a  life  of  eternal  bliss  beyond  the  grave,  nat- 
urally at  first  attracted  the  less  fortunate  in  greater 
numbers  than  the  more  fortunate.  But  this  was  not  Paul's 
intention.  Looking  out  over  the  great  world,  the  apostle 
to  the  Gentiles  declared  that  the  church  ought  to  include 
everybody  —  Jew  and  Greek,  barbarian  and  Scythian, 
slave  and  freeman,  male  and  female  (Colossians  3  :11 ;  Ga- 
latians  3 :28 ;  1  Corinthians  12 :13).  Where  Jesus  at  least 
approached  the  problem  of  cleavage  in  a  concrete  way^ 
Paul  avoids  the  subject. 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  225 

Christianity  spread  at  first  mostly  in  the  cities.  Writ- 
ing about  A.  D.  50  to  his  converts  in  Corinth,  a  represent- 
ative city  of  the  Empire,  Paul  reminds  them  that  "not 
many  wise  after  the  flesh,  not  many  mighty,  not  many 
noble"  were  among  them  (1  Corinthians  1 :  26).  As  Pro- 
fessor McGiffert  observes,  the  Christian  victims  of  the 
Neronian  persecution  of  64  a.  d.  were  evidently  from  the 
lowest  classes  of  society,  or  the  emperor  would  not  have 
dared  to  treat  them  as  he  did  (19).  As  we  have  many 
times  remarked,  the  lower  class  included  slaves  and  poor 
freemen.  The  apostolic  church  evidently  drew  a  large 
part  of  its  membership  from  the  personally  enslaved  lower 
class  as  well  as  from  the  personally  free  lower  class.  In 
Ephesians  6:5,  8,  the  writer  issues  the  following  injunc- 
tion to  Christian  bondservants :  "Slaves,  be  obedient  unto 
them  that  according  to  the  flesh  are  your  lords,  knowing 
that  whatsoever  good  thing  each  one  doeth,  the  same  shall 
he  receive  again  from  the  Lord,  whether  he  be  a  slave  or  a 
freeman."*  In  Colossians  3:22  we  read:  "Slaves,  obey 
in  all  things  them  that  are  your  lords  according  to  the 
flesh."  In  1  Timothy  6:1:  "Let  as  many  as  are  slaves 
under  the  yoke  count  their  own  masters  worthy  of  all 
honor."  In  Titus  2 :9 :  "Exhort  slaves  to  be  in  subjection 
to  their  own  masters,  and  to  be  well  pleasing  in  all  things, 
not  gainsaying,  not  purloining,  but  showing  all  good  fidel- 
ity."   In  the  letter  to  Philemon  we  see  Paul  returning  a 

*  The  King  James  Bible  uses  the  word  "servants"  for  the  term  here 
freely  rendered  "slaves."  On  the  other  hand,  as  the  men  who  produced 
the  Revised  English  Bible  say  in  the  margin,  the  word  which  their  prede- 
cessors had  translated  "servants"  is  more  accurately  rendered  "bond- 
servants." It  ought  to  be  manifest,  surely,  that  the  passage  here  quoted 
should  commence  with  a  term  like  "bondservant,"  or  "slave,"  implying 
ownership  by  an  economic  superior,  in  order  to  consist  intelligibly  with 
the  conclusion  of  the  passage,  which  even  the  King  James  translators 
could  not  escape  rendering  "bond  or  free."  Allowance  ought,  perhaps, 
to  be  made  in  their  favor  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  word  "servant" 
carried  a  lower  implication  in  the  seventeenth  century  than  it  has  now; 
but  there  is  no  excuse  for  using  their  translation  ?t  the  present  time. 
15 


AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


fugitive  Christian  slave  to  his  owner,  saying  that  he 
thought  the  slave  had  wronged  the  master  in  running 
away.  Another  testimony  to  the  presence  of  the  poor  in 
the  early  church  is  found  in  the  anxiety  for  collections  of 
money.  The  apostle  to  the  Gentiles  tells  us  that  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  famous  Jerusalem  conference,  the  "pil- 
lar apostles,"  Peter,  James,  and  John,  gave  to  him  and 
Barnabas  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  that  Paul  and  his 
companion  should  go  to  the  Gentiles,  and  they  to  the  cir- 
cumcision, adding,  "only  they  would  that  we  should  re- 
member the  poor,  which  very  thing  I  was  also  zealous  to 
do"  (Galatians  2:10).  The  collections  taken  were  used, 
not  for  the  poor  in  the  non-Christian  world  outside  the 
church,  but  especially  for  them  that  were  of  the  "house- 
hold of  faith,"  the  "poor  saints,"  and  the  "poor  brethren." 
But  if  the  church  at  first  consisted  principally  of  poor 
freemen  and  slaves,  it  included  an  increasing  proportion 
of  more  fortunate  people  —  the  rich :  the  slaveholders  and 
the  landowners.  The  master  Philemon,  to  whom  Paul  re- 
turned the  fugitive  bondservant,  was  a  beloved  fellow- 
worker  in  the  gospel,  and  a  member  of  a  church  that  met 
in  his  own  house.  As  we  have  already  observed,  there  was 
really  nothing  to  keep  such  people  out.  The  older  relig- 
ions were  collapsing  by  this  time.  People  were  ceasing  to 
believe  them,  or  to  find  any  comfort  in  them ;  and  Pauline 
Christianity,  with  the  novel  background  of  Judaism,  was 
well  fitted  to  replace  them.  The  little  churches,  composed 
principally  of  slaves  and  poor  freemen,  who  met  in  pri- 
vate houses,  gladly  welcomed  into  their  brotherhood  strag- 
glers like  Philemon  from  the  more  fortunate  classes,  who 
contributed  from  their  wealth  to  the  needs  of  the  new 
movement.  In  1  Timothy  6:2,  Paul  indirectly  speaks  of 
early  Christian  slaveholders  when  he  exhorts  Christian 
slaves  not  to  despise  "believing  masters,"  because  these 
masters  are  brothers  in  Christ.  In  Ephesians  6 :9,  Chris- 
tian masters  are  commanded  to  treat  their  slaves  well. 
Similarly,  in  Colossians  4:1,  we  read :  "Lords,  render 
unto  your  slaves  that  which  is  just  and  equal."    Thus  it  is 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  227 

evident  that  the  upper  classes  began  to  be  "converted," 
and  to  "join  the  Church"  in  growing  numbers.  Indeed  be- 
fore the  close  of  the  first  century  of  the  Christian  era  one 
Christian  writer  thought  it  well  to  sound  a  note  of  warn- 
ing against  the  favor  shown  by  the  church  to  the  wealthy. 
This  writer's  composition  has  come  down  to  us  under  the 
title,  "The  General  Epistle  of  James."  His  letter  was 
written  late  in  the  century  —  probably  about  90  A.  d.  (20). 
When  reading  the  passage  herewith  reproduced,  we  should 
bear  in  mind  that  it  occurs  in  a  letter  which  does  duty,  not 
as  a  local  and  special  writing,  but  as  a  general  epistle : 

"My  brethren,  hold  not  the  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  with  respect  of  persons.  For  if  there  come  into 
your  assembly  a  man  with  a  gold  ring,  in  fine  clothing, 
and  there  come  in  also  a  poor  man  in  vile  clothing ;  and  ye 
have  regard  to  him  that  weareth  the  fine  clothing,  and  say, 
Sit  thou  here  in  a  good  place ;  and  ye  say  to  the  poor  man, 
Stand  thou  there,  or  sit  under  my  footstool;  are  ye  not 
divided  among  yourselves,  and  become  judges  with  evil 
thoughts?  Hearken,  my  beloved  brethren;  did  not  God 
ehoose  them  that  are  poor  as  to  the  world  to  be  rich  in 
faith,  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  which  he  promised  to  them 
that  love  him?  But  ye  have  dishonored  the  poor  man.  Do 
not  the  rich  oppress  you,  and  themselves  drag  you  before 
the  judgment-seats?"  (James  2 : 1-6). 

We  learn  from  the  testimony  of  the  Church  Fathers 
that  in  the  second  century  the  larger  part  of  the  Church 
was  still  recruited  from  the  uneducated,  humbler  class 
(21).  But  the  second  and  third  centuries  marked  the 
steadily  decreasing  influence  of  the  lower  class,  and  the 
corresponding  growth  of  aristocratic  tendencies  in  the 
Church.  The  rich  multiplied  their  offerings;  and  it  be- 
<?ame  not  infrequent  for  the  wealthy,  upon  their  decease, 
to  leave  property  to  the  Church  by  will.  Gifts  and  lega- 
cies at  first  assumed  the  form  of  money  and  other  wealth. 
But  more  and  more  the  possessions  of  the  Church  em- 
braced landed  property.  Gibbon  has  indicated  conditions 
in  the  third  Christian  century  in  the  following  sentence: 


228  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

"Before  the  close  of  the  third  century,  many  consid- 
erable estates  were  conferred  on  the  opulent  churches  of 
Kome,  Milan,  Carthage,  Antioch,  Alexandria,  and  the 
other  great  cities  of  Italy  and  the  provinces"  (22). 

Kespecting  the  early  years  of  the  fourth  century,  Hal- 
lam  writes : 

"It  was  among  the  first  effects  of  the  conversion  of 
[the  emperor]  Constantine  to  give,  not  only  a  security,  but 
a  legal  sanction  to  the  territorial  acquisitions  of  the 
church.  The  edict  of  Milan,  313,  recognizes  the  actual  es- 
tates of  the  ecclesiastical  corporations.  Another,  pub- 
lished in  321,  grants  to  all  the  subjects  of  the  empire  the 
power  of  bequeathing  their  property  to  the  church.  His 
own  liberality  and  that  of  his  successors  set  an  example 
which  did  not  want  imitators''  (23). 

The  spread  of  Christianity  through  the  upper  stratum 
is  interestingly  shown  by  the  fortieth  and  forty-first  can- 
ons of  the  Synod  of  Elvira,  which  was  held  about  the  year 
305.  It  was  declared  that  the  Christian  landlord  ought 
not  to  permit  his  pagan  tenants  to  pay  rents  in  kind  if 
these  products  —  for  instance,  flesh  and  vegetables  —  had 
been  previously  offered  to  idols;  and  that  the  Christian 
master  ought  not  to  permit  pagan  slaves  to  keep  idols  on 
his  property  (24). 

It  is  plain  that  between  the  first  and  fifth  centuries  a 
mighty  change  was  wrought.  At  the  former  date  the 
Church  consisted  of  small  bodies  of  obscure  people,  with 
no  comprehensive  organization  and  no  regularly  ap- 
pointed leaders.  At  the  latter  date  we  find  it  with  wholly 
changed  fortunes,  a  state  institution,  drawing  its  mem- 
bership from  upper  and  lower  classes,  divided  sharply  into 
laity  and  clergy,  its  higher  officers  holding  great  estates 
of  landed  and  movable  property,  and  assimilated  with  the 
secular  upper  class.  In  short,  the  primitive  groups  of 
Christians  had  been  transformed  into  a  powerful  social 
engine  —  the  Eoman  Catholic  Church  —  whereof  we  shall 
see  more  in  our  survey  of  western  civilization  (25). 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  229 

§  138. —  Keligious  conditions  in  the  fifth  century  have 
been  so  well  depicted  by  Professor  Dill  in  his  work  on  the 
Koman  society  of  this  period  that  we  quote  him : 

"The  line  between  Christian  and  pagan  was  long  wav- 
ering and  uncertain.  We  find  adherents  of  the  opposing 
creeds  side  by  side  even  in  the  same  family  at  the  end  of 
the  fourth  century.  .  .  .  Anyone  acquainted  with  the 
life  of  St.  Jerome  will  remember  Paula,  the  great  Roman 
lady,  who  was  the  aristocratic  leader  of  the  exodus  to  the 
Holy  Places.  She  gave  up  all  her  vast  wealth  to  maintain 
the  religious  houses  which  she  founded  at  Bethlehem. 
Her  whole  soul  was  absorbed  in  the  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  in  the  thought  of  the  life  to  come.  Yet  Paula 
was  united  in  early  youth  to  a  noble  named  Julius  Toxo- 
tius,  who  boasted  of  his  descent  from  Aeneas,  and  who  re- 
fused to  abandon  the  worship  of  his  ancestors.  Their  son, 
the  younger  Toxotius,  who,  at  any  rate  in  his  youth,  was 
also  a  staunch  pagan,  was  married  to  Laeta,  another  de- 
voted friend  of  St.  Jerome,  to  whom  he  addressed  a  letter 
on  the  proper  education  for  a  Christian  maiden.  Laeta 
herself  was  the  offspring  of  a  mixed  marriage.  Her 
mother  was  a  Christian,  and  her  father  was  one  of  the 
most  distinguished  chiefs  of  the  pagan  aristocracy,  Publi- 
lius  Caeonius  Albinus.  The  affectionate  relations  of  this 
household  seem  to  have  been  quite  undisturbed  by  the  dif- 
ference of  creed  among  its  members.  St.  Jerome  speaks  of 
Albinus  in  a  friendly  tone  as  a  most  learned  and  disting- 
uished man,  and  sketches  a  pleasant  picture  of  the  old 
heathen  pontiff  listening  to  his  granddaughter  singing  her 
infant  hymns  to  Christ.  .  .  In  general  society  the 
cultivated  skeptic  or  pagan  appears  to  have  often  main- 
tained a  friendly  intimacy  even  with  the  most  uncompro- 
mising champions  of  the  church.  The  correspondence  of 
St.  Augustine  reveals  the  singular  freedom  and  candor 
with  which  the  great  religious  questions  of  the  time  were 
debated  between  the  cultivated  members  of  the  two  par- 
ties" (26). 


230  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

After  an  ineffectual  attempt  to  remedy  the  evils  grow- 
ing out  of  the  social  problem,  Christianity  thus  turns  its 
head  toward  the  clouds,  and  "stands  gazing  up  into 
heaven,''  without  closely  studying  the  real  course  of 
events  on  the  earth. 

§  139. —  The  growing  worldliness  of  the  Church  pro- 
duced a  reaction  which  issued  in  another  institution  of  re- 
ligion. Persons  disgusted  with  the  world  went  into  the 
deserts  and  country  places  to  live  a  holy  life.  Such  were 
called  "monks."  But  these,  too,  obeyed  the  powerful  col- 
lective impulse.  They  associated  in  growing  numbers ;  ac- 
cepted endowments  from  wealthy  Christians;  and  in  time 
the  Church  adopted  monasticism  as  one  branch  of  its  or- 
ganization. 

§140. —  As  the  Church  extended  its  power  and  per- 
fected its  machinery,  society  continued  steadily  to  decline. 
In  the  fifth  century  after  the  birth  of  Christ,  the  Empire 
collapsed  in  its  ancient  seat;  and  the  barbarian  tribes 
came  into  control  of  all  the  West.  In  Greece  and  the  East, 
the  Koman  power,  indeed,  lived  on  for  a  time;  but  that 
part  of  the  world,  as  the  issue  proved,  no  longer  lay  in  the 
main  path  of  human  progress. 

The  center  of  historical  interest,  having  shifted  from 
the  eastern  to  the  northern  seaboard  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean, passes  now  into  western  Europe  as  whole.  Here  a 
third  great  civilization  emerges  from  savagery  and  bar- 
barism, assimilates  the  achievements  of  its  predecessors^ 
makes  original  contributions  to  progress,  and  assumes  the 
leadership  of  the  world. 

(1)— Thucydides,  History  (Boston,  1883.     Jowett's  trans.),  pp.  1-2. 

(2)— Cf.  Hall,  The  Oldest  Civilization  of  Greece  (London,  1901), 
p.  20.  Cf.  RiDGEWAY,  The  Early  Age  of  Greece  (Cambridge,  1901),  chaps. 
1  and  2. 

(3)— DuNCKER,  History  of  Greece  (Lonlon,  1886.  Alleyne  and 
Abbott's  trans.),  H,  pp.  119,  138,  312.  Cf.  Grote,  History  of  Greece 
(N.  Y.,  1875)  Pt.  2,  chap.  9.  Cf.  Duruy,  History  of  Greece  (London, 
1898),  I,  chap.  5.  Cf.  Mommsen,  History  of  Rome  (N.  Y.,  Dickson's 
trans.),  I,  p.  80. 


[ 


CLASSIC   CIVILIZATION.  231 


(4) — Cf.  DuNCKER,  History  of  Greece,  II,  pp.  5-15. 

(5)— MoMMSEN,  History  of  Rome,  I,  pp.  261,  262. 

(6)— Idem,  I,   p.   111. 

(7)— CuRTius,  History  of  Greece  (N.  Y.,  1875),  I,  p.  339. 

(8)— DUNCKER,   II,  p.  319. 

(9)— Abbott,  History  of  Greece  (N.  Y.,  1888),  I,  p.  367. 

(10) — MoMMSEN,  I,  pp.  370,  371.  Cf.  Ramsey  and  Lanciani,  Ro- 
man Antiquities  (London,  1894),  p.  91.  Cf.  Morgan,  Ancient  Society 
(N.  Y.,  1878),  pp.  215-343. 

(11) — Mahaffy,  Problems  in  Greek  History  (London,  1892),  pp. 
16,  88.  Cf.  ScHOMAN,  Antiquities  of  Greece  (London,  1880.  Hardy  and 
Mann's  trans.),  p.  347. 

(12) — Merivale,  History  of  the  Romans  under  the  Empire  (N.  Y., 
1889),  VII,  p.  484.  On  class  relations  in  Greece  and  Italy  generally,  see 
the  following:  Gilbert,  Greek  Constitutional  Antiquities  (London, 
1895,  Brooks  and  Nicklin's  trans.),  p.  170-200.  Ramsey  and 
Lanciani,  Roman  Antiquities  (London,  1894),  chaps.  2  and  3, 
ScHOMAN,  Antiquities  of  Greece,  Part  1,  chap.  4;  Part  2, 
chaps.  3  and  4.  Mahaffy,  Social  Life  in  Greece  (London,  1892),  Chap. 
9.  Blumner,  Home  Life  of  the  Ancient  Greeks  (London,  1893),  Chap. 
15.  GuHL  AND  Koner,  Life  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans  (London,  1880), 
p.  509.  Cox,  Greek  Statesmen  (N.  Y.,  1885-6),  passim.  Simcox,  Ora- 
tions of  Demosthenes,  etc.     (Oxford,  1872),  XXV. 

(13) — Cf.  Dill,  Roman  Society  in  the  Fifth  Century,  a.  d.,  (Lon- 
don, 1899),  pp.  138,  139. 

(14)— Peabody,  Jesus  Christ  and  the  Social  Question  (N.  Y.,  1901), 
p.  229. 

(15) — Cf.  Schurer,  The  Jewish  People  in  the  time  of  Jesus  Christ, 
passim. 

■   (16)— Bruce,  Apologetics  (N.  Y.,  1899),  p.  177. 

(17) — Friedlander,  in  Jewish  Quarterly  Review,  Jan.,  1902. 

(18)— Cf.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  the  Traveller  (N.  Y.,  1898),  pp.  19, 
20.  Cf.  McGiFFERT,  History  of  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age  (N.  Y., 
1900),  pp.  172,  173. 

(19)— Cf.  McGiFFERT,  ibid.,  p.  629.  Cf.  Fisher,  History  of  the 
Christian  Church  (N.  Y.,  1894),  pp.  34,  35,  39. 

(20)— Bacon,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament  (N.  Y.,  1902), 
p.  165.     Cf.  McGiFFERT,  The  Apostolic  Age,  p.  581. 

(21)— Fisher,  History  of  Christian  Doctrine   (N.  Y.,  1899),  p.  52. 

(22)— Gibbon,  Decline  of  the  Roman  Empire  (N.  Y.,  Harper,  1900), 
chap.  15,  p.  134. 

(23) — Hallam,  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages,  chap.  7.  Cf.  Milman, 
History  of  Latin  Christianity  (N.  Y.,  1889),  I,  pp.  507-511,  536. 

(24)— Hefele,  History  of  the  Church  Councils  (Edinburg,  1883. 
Clark's  trans.),  I,  p.  154.  Cf.  pp.  424-426;  II,  pp.  186,  301,  306;  III,  p. 
169.     Cf.  Lea,  Yale  Review  (New  Haven),  II,  p.  356. 

(25) — For  passages  on  the  influence  and  functions  of  the  Church 
in  the  last  century  of  the  "Western  Empire,  cf.  Dill,  p.  215.  Kitchin, 
History  of  France  (Oxford,  1873),  I,  pp.  64,  65, 

(26)— Dill,  pp.  13,  14. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


WESTERN   CIVILIZATION. 


§  141. —  The  social  development  of  western  civiliza- 
tion began  on  the  same  level  as  that  of  the  oriental  and 
classic  worlds.  In  the  background  of  the  history  of  our 
great  modern  states  is  the  shifting  scene  of  tribal  migra- 
tion and  war.  A  passage  from  Strabo,  a  Greek  geographer 
who  lived  at  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era, 
gives  an  interesting  view  of  barbaric  Germany,  from 
whose  forests  issued  the  tribes  that  finally  overwhelmed 
the  western  Roman  Empire: 

"Common  to  all  the  inhabitants  of  this  land  is  their 
readiness  to  migrate  —  a  consequence  of  the  simplicity  of 
their  mode  of  life,  their  ignorance  of  agriculture  in  the 
proper  sense,  and  their  custom,  instead  of  laying  in  stores 
of  provisions,  of  living  in  huts  and  providing  only  for  the 
needs  of  the  day.  They  derive  most  of  their  food  from 
their  cattle,  like  the  Nomads;  and  imitating  them  they 
load  their  goods  and  furniture  on  wagons,  and  move  with 
their  cattle  wherever  they  like"  (1). 

In  the  fifth  century  after  Christ  a  host  of  barbarians 
came  pouring  out  of  the  German  forests.  This  movement 
was  caused  partly  by  the  increase  of  a  population  which 
was  unable  to  extract  subsistence  from  its  home  territory 
on  the  capitalistic  basis  then  prevailing,  and  partly  by  the 
pressure  of  outlying  tribes  from  eastern  Europe  and  Asia. 
It  was  plainly  a  mere  involution  of  the  vast  cosmic  pro- 
cess that  underlies  all  history.  Everywhere  that  Rome 
had  ruled  in  western  Europe  her  power  was  overthrown; 
and  the  barbarian  flood  rose  to  high  tide.  In  Britain  the 
Angles  and  Saxons,  and  later  the  Normans,  established 
themselves.    On  the  soil  of  Gaul,  or  France,  and  reaching 

232 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  233 

back  into  Germany,  the  Franks  became  the  dominant  race. 
In  Italy  the  Lombards,  and  in  Spain  the  Visigoths,  took 
possession.* 

§  142. —  At  the  historical  beginning  of  western  civili- 
zation we  read  everywhere  the  old  story  of  advance  from 
the  nomadic  to  the  settled  life ;  of  the  drawing  together  of 
men  into  social  bodies  of  increasing  size;  of  the  mingling 
of  conquerors  and  conquered;  and  of  the  stratifl-ca- 
tion  of  society  into  two  principal  classes,  upper  and  lower. 
It  is  plain  that  cleavage  in  western  civilization,  as  in  the 
oriental  and  classic  worlds,  did  not  commence  in  the  full 
daylight  of  history.  Tacitus  and  Gsesar  show  that  it  had 
begun  within  the  tribes  at  an  early  period,  long  before  the 
fall  of  the  Empire  (3). 

§  143. —  Brought  actively  to  the  front  during  the 
early  wars,  the  upper  class  consisted  at  first  of  a  mili- 
tary, landholding  nobility  divided  into  clans,  or  gens,  like 
the  original  aristocracies  of  the  oriental  and  classic  civil- 
izations. And,  as  in  these  earlier  communities,  the  clan 
nobility  constituted  the  State,  and  wielded  the  power  of 
society  in  its  corporate  capacity. 

But  this  nobility  soon  added  to  itself  another  element. 
By  the  "conversion''  of  the  barbarians  to  Christianity,  the 
Eoman  Catholic  Church  was  extended  from  its  home  in 
Italy  throughout  all  the  communities  of  western  Europe. 
Everywhere  lavish  grants  of  land  were  made  by  no- 
bles and  kings  to  the  bishops  and  the  monastic  orders 
(4).    In  England,  the  nobility  made  generous  provision  for 

*  In  tracing  the  growth  of  western  civilization,  we  shall  consider 
the  subject  mainly,  but  not  exclusively,  from  the  standpoint  of  English 
history.  There  are  three  reasons  for  this :  The  evolution  of  England 
illustrates,  and  eventually  becomes  the  pattern  for,  the  development  of 
modern  civilization;  the  literary  sources  of  English  history  surpass  those 
of  the  other  European  countries;  and,  last  but  not  least,  our  space  is 
limited.  With  reference  to  the  sources,  Professor  Gross  observes: 
*'Owing  mainly  to  the  blessings  of  insularity,  and  to  the  absence  of 
violent  domestic  revolutions,  the  national  archives  of  England  are  older, 
richer,  more  continuous,  and  more  nearly  complete  than  those  of  any 
other  European  nation"  (2). 


234  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  Church.  The  country  had  not  yet  been  united  into  a 
nation;  and  bishoprics  were  established  in  each  tribal 
kingdom  (5).  The  clergy  subsisted  upon  the  produce  of 
their  own  local  estates;  while  some  of  their  lands 
were  leased  for  payments  in  kind,  in  personal  service,  or  in 
money  —  although  not  much  of  the  latter  was  in  circula- 
tion as  yet.  It  is  estimated  that  after  the  Norman  Con- 
quest in  the  eleventh  century,  the  ecclesiastical  nobility 
held  thirty  per  cent,  of  the  cultivated  soil  (6).  Thus,  the 
Church  system,  with  its  aristocratic  constitution,  passed 
over  entire  into  the  life  of  the  young  states  that  took  the 
place  of  Kome  in  western  Europe. 

Keligious  ministration  consumed  a  relatively  small 
part  of  the  activities  of  the  Church;  and  the  priesthood 
occupied,  in  fact,  the  same  large  place  that  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal wing  of  the  upper  stratum  had  held  in  the  older  civili- 
zations. The  churchly  nobility  conserved  the  knowledge 
acquired  by  the  ancient  world;  and  furnished  the  secular 
nobility  with  civil  administrators.  In  the  upgrowth  of 
western  civilization,  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  was 
nothing  less  than  a  power  of  the  first  magnitude.  It  is 
difficult  for  us  to  realize  that  period  in  which  the  Church 
was  the  representative  at  once  "of  politics,  legal  knowl- 
edge, diplomacy,  education,  literature,  and  much  more  be- 
sides; a  period  in  which  the  clergy  were  not  only  father 
confessors,  but  belonged  to  the  state  as  chancellors,  treas- 
urers, ambassadors,  justices,  clerks  of  the  court,  barris- 
ters, attornies,  physicians,  accountants,  and  secreta- 
ries" (7). 

Thus,  the  upper  class  consisted  of  two  sections.  The 
ecclesiastical  wing  was  known  as  the  "First  Estate;"  the 
secular  nobility,  as  the  "Second  Estate."  But  we  must 
not  be  confused  by  names  and  forms.  We  must  bear  in 
mind  that,  sociologically,  the  First  and  Second  Estates 
were  not  independent  bodies.  They  composed  a  single  up- 
per stratum,  which  absorbed  a  large  portion  of  the  labor 
products  of  the  lower  class,  attracted  the  best  intellect. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  235 

and  gave  practical  expression  to  all  the  forces  of  social 
development. 

§  144. —  Below  this  composite  upper  order  lay  the 
great  lower  class  in  a  legal  condition  which,  with  excep- 
tions presently  to  be  noted,  is  broadly  described  under  the 
name  of  serfdom,  or  serf-slavery.  The  serf  was,  according 
to  law,  compelled  to  remain  on  the  land  of  his  lord,  who, 
as  we  have  seen,  might  be  either  a  secular  or  an  ecclesiasti- 
cal  noble.  Occupying  a  stated  assignment  of  the  soil  on 
some  great  estate,  and  living  in  his  own  little  hut,  the  serf 
must  give  to  his  lord  a  portion  of  his  labor  products,  and, 
for  a  part  of  the  time,  put  his  labor  at  the  disposal  of  the 
same  superior  authority.  Both  of  these  conditions,  of 
course,  amounted  to  essentially  the  same  thing  —  upper- 
class  control  of  lower-class  labor  without  direct  economic 
repayment.  Broadly  speaking,  this  was  the  condition  of 
the  bulk  of  the  lower  class  throughout  Europe  for  many 
centuries  after  the  fall  of  the  Empire.  The  status  of  the 
masses  naturally  varied  within  certain  limits,  and  at  dif- 
ferent places  and  times.  Some  of  the  peasantry  could  al- 
most be  called  free.  But,  as  Vinogradoff  observes  respect- 
ing mediaeval  English  conditions,  "it  would  be  difficult  to 
speak  of  free  peasantry  in  the  modern  sense.  .  .  Some 
kind  or  form  of  dependence  often  clings  even  to  those  who 
occupy  the  best  place  among  the  villagers  as  recognized 
free  tenants,  and  in  most  cases  we  have  a  strong  infusion 
of  subjection  in  the  life  of  otherwise  privileged  peasants'' 
(8).  It  would  be  wearisome  to  linger  over  the  details  of 
the  lower-class  constitution.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  the 
mass  of  the  community  occupied  an  inferior  position  with 
reference  to  the  great  landholding  order  —  a  smaller  part 
of  the  lower  class  consisting  of  tenants,  who  paid  a  stated 
rent,  and  were  otherwise  practically  free;  the  larger  part 
consisting  of  serfs  (9). 

§  145. —  Notwithstanding  the  legal  fixedness  of  the 
lower  class,  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  labor  was  im- 
movable in  the  Middle  Age.  Although  the  serf  might  not 
of  his  own  will  depart  from  the  soil  whereon  he  was  born, 


236  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

he  could  be  moved  by  his  lord  from  one  estate  to  another, 
or  from  agricultural  to  manufacturing  work  (10).  Again, 
a  lord  could  send  into  a  foreign  country,  and  purchase 
from  some  other  lord  the  services  of  desirable  workmen. 
Benedict  Biscop,  Abbott  of  Wearmouth  Monastery, 
brought  workmen  from  beyond  the  sea  ( 11).  King  Alfred 
the  Great  did  the  same  (12).  Charlemagne  sent  for  labor- 
ers from  foreign  parts  (13).  King  John  ordered  iron- 
smelters  to  be  sent  from  Durham,  England,  over  into  Ire- 
land (14). 

§  146. —  It  should  also  be  noted  that  in  western  soci- 
ety, as  in  the  oriental  and  classic  worlds,  there  were  no 
impassible  barriers  between  upper  and  lower  classes. 
Many  roads  were  open  to  the  ascent  of  ability.  "Great 
facilities  for  rising  from  class  to  class  in  the  social  order," 
says  Professor  Stubbs,  "are  not  at  all  inconsistent  with 
very  strong  class  jealousies  and  antipathies  and  broad 
lines  of  demarkation"  (15).  Modes  of  advance  in  the  eco- 
nomic world  will  become  evident  as  we  proceed.  Mean- 
while the  following  passage  from  Kogers  can  hardly  be 
omitted : 

"All  the  prospects  which  the  Church  offered  .  .  . 
were  open  in  effect  to  the  mass  of  the  people.  .  .  The 
son  of  a  villain  [serf]  could,  if  fortune,  or  merit  .  . 
favored  him,  reach  from  the  hut  of  his  parents  to  the  mitre 
of  a  parliamentary  abbott,  to  the  crozier  of  the  bishop,  to 
the  custody  of  the  great  seal,  to  the  wand  of  the  lord  high 
treasurer,  to  the  princely  state  of  the  Koman  Cardinal. 
Fox,  the  founder  of  Corpus  Christi  College  in  Oxford,  is 
said  to  have  left  his  home  at  an  early  age  in  order  to  be 
trained  for  the  Church,  and  on  journeying  down  some 
time  afterward  to  Lincolnshire,  to  have  told  his  parents, 
when  they  wished  him  to  stay  with  them,  that  their  home- 
stead would  not  serve  for  the  kitchen  of  the  house  that  he 
was  building  for  himself.  Never  perhaps  in  the  social  his- 
tory of  nations  was  there  so  great  an  opportunity  for  ca- 
pacity to  rise  by  acknowledged  roads  to  dignity"  (16). 


\ 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  237 

§  147. —  It  required  about  one  thousand  years  —  from 
the  fifth  to  the  sixteenth  century  —  for  the  development 
of  the  barbarian  tribes  into  a  community  stable  and  civil- 
ized enough  to  take  up  the  work  of  progress  which  had 
been  laid  down  by  classic  civilization.  This  period  of 
preparation  we  now  call  "The  Middle  Age,"  since  it  lies 
between  ancient  and  modern  history.  It  was  the  birth 
time  of  the  great  nations  of  today.  The  Middle  Age  itself 
may  be  reviewed  in  two  divisions  of  five  hundred  years 
each  —  the  Dark  Age,  and  the  Age  of.  Awakening. 

In  the  Dark  Age,  extending,  say,  from  the  fifth  to  the 
eleventh  century,  western  Europe  was  on  a  primitive,  ag- 
ricultural basis.  No  large  manufacturing  industries  had 
sprung  up.  Production  was  of  a  simple  and  primitive 
character,  and  mostly  for  local  consumption.  These  con- 
ditions alone  would  have  prevented  extensive  commerce; 
and  others  operated  in  the  same  direction.  It  was  dif- 
ficult for  people  to  discover  each  others  wants  and  prod- 
ucts. Movable  wealth  was  insecure.  Traveling  in  the  open 
country  was  unsafe.  Means  of  transportation  and  com- 
munication were  exceedingly  primitive.  There  was  but 
little  money  in  circulation.  There  were  no  strong  and 
permanently  established  governments  with  wide  jurisdic- 
tions (17). 

In  the  Age  of  Awakening,  which  extended,  say,  from 
the  tenth  to  the  sixteenth  century,  the  picture  is  brighter. 
Progress  of  a  most  substantial  kind  raised  western  Eu- 
rope to  a  position  from  which,  moving  outward  into  mod- 
ern history,  it  could  take  up  in  earnest  the  work  of  de- 
velopment where  the  ancient  civilizations  had  stopped. 
Governments  with  wider  jurisdictions  were  formed.  Law 
and  order  were  established  more  securely  and  uniformly. 
Multiplying  international  treaties,  and  the  steady  pres- 
sure of  the  universal  Church,  along  with  other  influences, 
paved  the  way  for  a  growing  cosmopolitanism.  The  study 
of  old  manuscripts  and  books  revived  the  learning  of  the 
ancients.  Manners  were  softened.  Commerce  and  man- 
ufactures reached  an  extensive  development;  and  the  in- 


238  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

creasing  circulation  of  money  diminished  the  area  of  prim- 
itive barter. 

§  148. —  In  the  old  Saxon  Dialogs,  the  merchant  says 
that  he  brings  home  "skins,  silks,  costly  gems  and  gold, 
various  garments,  pigments,  wine,  oil,  ivory,  orichalcus, 
copper  and  tin,  silver,  glass  and  such  like"  (18). 

It  has  been  observed  that  this  passage  is  a  good  illus- 
tration of  the  fact  (already  twice  brought  out  by  the  pres- 
ent inquiry)  that  trade  as  an  independent  occupation  first 
arises  in  the  service  of  the  upper  class  (19).  It  is  well  to 
notice  this  fact  again,  since  we  are  dealing  with  condi- 
tions more  fully  in  the  light  of  history,  and  leading  up 
through  a  straighter  path  to  the  society  in  which  we  live. 

Throughout  western  Europe  in  the  second  half  of  the 
Middle  Age  a  merchant  class  gradually  arose  to  engineer 
trade,  and  to  make  itself  a  power  in  the  community.  It 
became  known  as  the  "Third  Estate."  But  names  are 
often  misleading;  and  just  as  the  First  and  Second  Es- 
tates composed  what  was  in  effect  a  single  upper  stratum, 
,«o  the  Third  Estate  was  a  development  of  the  upper  class 
under  a  new  form. 

The  origin  of  the  Third  Estate  must  be  sought  in  ages 
in  which  it  had  no  existence  as  a  class.  The  lay  or  eccle- 
siastical noble  was  too  much  absorbed  in  large  business  to 
exercise  detailed  oversight  of  the  great  throngs  of  humble 
folk  on  his  estates.  His  lands  were  often  widely  scat- 
tered in  different  parts  of  the  country  (20);  and  it  was 
necessary  for  him  to  have  a  staff  of  managers,  bailiffs,  or 
stewards,  to  superintend  his  affairs.  These  persons  were 
in  serfdom;  and  they  reached  their  positions  by  proved 
fitness.  It  was  one  of  the  functions  of  such  men  to  super- 
intend the  exchange  of  surplus  products  for  goods  from 
other  localities.  Thus,  the  formation  of  a  servile,  or  un- 
free,  merchant  class  precedes  the  rise  of  a  free  merchant 
•class. 

Aside  from  the  proprietor  himself,  the  steward  was 
the  most  important  man  on  the  estate.  He  enjoyed  the 
confidence  of  his  lord.     He  was  favored  over  the  other 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  239 

lower-class  folk  in  proportion  to  his  importance.  As  a 
stimulus  to  the  best  performance  of  his  duties  he  was  per- 
mitted to  retain  a  part  of  the  goods  that  passed  through 
his  hands.  In  this  way  he  might  accumulate  considerable 
wealth,  which  the  law  guarded  from  arbitrary  seizure. 
When  money  came  into  use,  the  property  accumulated  by 
favored  serfs  took  the  form  of  cash,  or  could  be  exchanged 
for  cash. 

At  the  next  step  in  this  process,  the  lord  of  the  es- 
tate, becoming  pressed  for  ready  money,  permits  the 
thrifty  serf  to  buy  his  personal  freedom,  giving  him  a  quit- 
claim charter  as  evidence  of  his  new  position  in  life.  The 
following  passage  gives  a  case  in  point.  The  nobleman  is 
Bishop  Swinfield.  The  serf  is  Robert  Crul.  The  time  is 
1302: 

"Robert  Crul  was  a  bailiff  upon  one  of  the  farms  of 
the  bishop's  manor  of  Ross.  He  was  a  ^villien  regardant,' 
with  a  mother,  wife,  and  children  living  with  him.  In 
1302,  by  a  solemn  deed,  he  was  manumitted  by  the  bishop ; 
and  ^Robert  Crul,  of  Hamme,  and  Matilda  his  wife,  with 
all  his  offspring  begotten  and  to  be  begotten,  together  with 
all  his  goods  holden  and  to  be  holden,'  was  rendered  ^for- 
ever free  and  quit  from  all  yoke  of  servitude'  .... 
Robert  Crul,  by  his  industry  in  the  service  of  the  bishop, 
was  enabled  to  buy  his  freedom  for  forty  marks,  and  he 
became  the  founder  of  two  honorable  families.  This 
power  of  rising,  however  slowly  and  painfully,  out  of  the 
condition  in  which  they  were  born,  .  .  .  was,  no 
doubt,  the  sustaining  hope  of  many  of  the  more  frugal, 
diligent  and  intelligent  villans  of  that  age"  (21). 

After  his  enfranchizement,  a  man  like  Robert  Crul 
could  re-enter  the  service  of  his  former  owner,  or  the  em- 
ployment of  some  other  nobleman,  and  manage  his  trade 
for  him.  Or  he  could  contract  to  superintend  the  com- 
merce of  several  estates,  or  of  an  entire  locality. 

The  merchant  class  operated  for  several  centuries  un- 
der monopolistic  privileges  granted  by  the  nobility;  grew 


240  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

rich  by  retaining  commissions  on  the  goods  that  passed 
through  their  hands ;  and  bought  landed  estates. 

The  purchase  of  land  clearly  marked  the  entrance  of  a 
wealthy  merchant  into  the  upper  class ;  and  in  many  such 
cases  a  title  of  nobility  was  granted  by  the  king  (22). 

§  149. — With  the  expansion  of  commerce  and  the  rise 
of  the  merchant  class  there  grew  silently  up  amidst  the 
old,  agricultural  economy,  with  its  peasant  huts  and 
lordly  castles,  a  new  economy  of  towns  and  cities.  In  the 
Middle  Age,  trade  could  not  go  on  continuously,  as  today. 
Its  beginnings  were  hampered,  as  we  have  learned,  by 
p great  obstacles.  Population  was  dispersed;  traveling  in 
the  open  country  was  unsafe ;  and  people  had  difficulty  in 
discovering  each  others  wants  and  products.  Under  such 
conditions,  the  legal  establishment  of  markets  and  fairs 
was  an  incalculable  social  benefit.  "Unless  traders  were 
brought  together  at  definite  centers  at  definite  times,"  re- 
marks Professor  Ashley,  "it  was  impossible  either  to  pro- 
tect them,  or  to  supervise  their  dealings  in  the  interest  of 
the  consumer,  or  to  obtain  from  them  those  payments 
which  formed  a  considerable  part  of  the  royal  revenue. 
Hence  the  policy  of  the  government  was  to  create  for 
trade  regular  channels  within  which  it  might  be  compelled 
to  move''  (23).  From  this  standpoint,  mediaeval  towns  and 
cities  have  been  well  and  simply  defined  as  privileged 
places  where  markets  were  held  (24).  The  new  centers  of 
population  grew  up  at  convenient  points  —  near  fortified 
stations,  monasteries,  and  churches,  on  rivers,  and  along 
the  sea-coast.  One  of  the  most  interesting  features  of  life 
in  that  age  is  the  selling  of  charters  to  the  towns  by  the 
lay  and  ecclesiastical  nobility  of  the  territories  whereon 
the  towns  arose  (25). 

§  150. —  Increased  exchange  of  wealth  was  associated 
with  increased  production  of  wealth.  In  order  to  examine 
the  growth  of  manufactures  and  of  industrial  capitalism 
it  will  be  necessary  once  more  to  retrace  our  steps. 

Social  development,  in  its  beginnings  as  well  as  in 
later  stages,  depends  upon  material  industry.    But  Indus- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  241 

try  as  we  think  of  it  today,  in  its  highly  organized  form, 
had  no  existence  in  the  earlier  historic  stages  of  social 
evolution.  In  early  times,  the  material  needs  of  associ- 
ated men  were  small  as  compared  with  other  social  needs. 
Upper-class  appropriations,  although  partly  converted 
into  industrial  capital,  were  more  largely  consumed  in  the 
immediate  personal  support  of  the  upper  orders  during 
their  discharge  of  non-industrial  functions.  The  extensive 
growth  of  manufactures  and  commerce  waits  always  upon 
the  organization  of  social  stability  over  wide  areas.  In 
the  three  great  circles  of  communities  (oriental,  classic, 
and  w^estern)  which  have  thus  far  come  before  us,  we  have 
seen  how  stability  was  organized  out  of  savagery  and  bar- 
barism, under  the  forms  of  the  Clan  State,  by  the  forces 
of  social  cleavage.  In  surveying  the  first  two  of  these,  we 
passed  rather  hurriedly  over  industry  and  commerce,  giv- 
ing more  attention  to  other  aspects  of  the  subject.  But  in 
western  civilization  the  industrial  phase  of  life  has  ac- 
quired an  importance  hitherto  unknown  —  in  large  part, 
as  we  must  apparently  believe,  because  the  energies  of 
western  society  have  been  released  from  the  mighty  task  of 
intellectual  beginnings  by  its  rich  inheritance  from  its 
predecessors.  The  principle  of  cleavage,  having  been  a 
powerful  factor  in  the  earlier  development  of  society,  has 
actively  operated  in  the  evolution  of  the  vast  industrial 
plant  existing  around  us  today. 

§  151. —  We  have  seen  that  in  the  confusion  of  the 
wars,  migrations,  and  settlements  during  the  first  half  of 
the  Middle  Age  the  community  existed  on  an  agricultural 
basis.  In  the  midst  of  these  conditions  the  beginnings  of 
manufactures  and  of  industrial  capital  are  to  be  found  on 
the  estates  of  the  secular  and  ecclesiastical  nobility  (26). 
It  was  only  here  that  industrial  capital  could  begin  to  ac- 
cumulate in  large  quantities.  This  general  truth  needs  to 
be  emphasized.  Manufacture,  like  commerce,  has  not 
grown  up  out  of  prehistoric  animality  in  self-centered  in- 
dependence, manned  by  free  workers  who  have  saved  their 

16 


242  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

own  capital.  The  upper  class  has  not  been  a  mere  para- 
sitic burden  upon  the  development  of  industry;  and,  as 
already  observed,  the  whole  subject  of  manufactures  and 
commerce  must  be  approached  from  the  standpoint  of 
cleavage. 

At  first  the  handicraftsman  w^as  also  an  agricultural 
worker.  The  pursuits  of  agriculture  involved  the  use  of 
implements,  clothes,  and  various  buildings.  These  things 
were,  for  a  time,  sufftciently  provided  by  temporary  drafts 
upon  the  regular  field  hands.  Such  temporary  handi- 
craftsmen were  chosen  from  those  that  showed  the  most 
proficiency  in  mechanical  pursuits. 

But  along  with  the  increase  of  trade  and  population, 
the  demand  for  mechanical  work  at  length  absorbed  the 
most  proficient  laborers;  and  thus  a  distinct  class  of  in- 
dustrial serfs  was  gradually  specialized.  There  were 
the  serf-carpenter,  the  serf-blacksmith,  the  serf-shoe- 
maker, etc. 

Part  of  the  raw  material  worked  up  by  the  artizan- 
serf  was  produced  on  the  home  estate;  but  an  increasing 
part  of  it  was  imported  from  elsewhere  through  the  deep- 
ening and  extending  channels  of  a  commercial  system 
which  was  growing  up,  so  to  speak,  over  his  head. 

Although  the  labor  products  of  the  artisan  serf  were 
appropriated  by  his  lord,  his  activities  contributed,  not 
alone  to  the  profit  of  the  nobility,  but  to  the  general  good. 
The  artizan  could  not  perform  his  work  without  food  and 
clothing ;  and  these  were  supplied  by  his  lord,  in  the  per- 
son of  bailiff  or  manager,  from  the  products  of  other  serfs. 
The  agricultural  workers,  now  able  to  devote  themselves 
more  continuously  and  efficiently  to  food-producing  occu- 
pations, were,  in  turn,  aided  by  the  labor  products  of  the ' 
artizan. 

These  hints  give  us  an  imperfect  view  of  the  social 
evolution  that  was  working  out  in  the  busy  fields  and  vil- 
lages and  towns  of  the  Middle  Age,  and  leading  up  from 
barbarism  to  the  life  of  today.  All  attempts  to  examine 
and  interpret  the  different  aspects  of  the  subject  reveal  its 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  243 

immense  complexity,  and  the  impossibility  of  tracing  it 
out  in  detail.  But  such  attempts,  while  showing  the  im- 
practicability of  detailed  reconstruction,  prove  that  the 
social  process  can  be  brought  within  the  terms  of  general 
propositions  that  faithfully  describe  the  real  facts. 

§  152. —  This,  the  most  primitive  stage  in  the  growth 
of  organized  manufactures,  began  to  be  widely  displaced 
in  England  in  the  thirteenth  century  by  the  "guild  sys- 
tem.'' Under  the  new  system  the  artizans  gained  their  lib- 
erty in  ways  presently  to  be  suggested,  and  became  towns- 
men, participating  in  the  chartered  rights  and  immunities 
purchased  from  the  lords  of  the  territories  whereon  the 
towns  arose.  Among  the  most  valued  privileges  conferred 
by  charter  was  that  of  having  a  general  "merchant  guild" 
(27).  The  guild  at  first  included  merchants  and  artizans 
alike,  and  gave  them  a  monopoly  of  trade  and  the  right  to 
fe  their  own  prices  (28).  No  man  might  carry  on  trade  or 
practice  a  craft  unless  he  joined  the  town  guild. 

The  transition  from  the  primitive  system  to  the  guild 
system  was  involved  in  the  growth  of  commerce  and  of  the 
towns  and  the  increasing  use  of  money.  A  part  of  the 
great  unconscious  movement  of  society,  it  was  resisted  by 
the  landed  nobility,  but  favored  by  them  at  the  same  time 
because  irresistible  (29).  Along  with  the  increasing  circu- 
lation of  money,  the  lower  classes  were  permitted  to  com- 
mute their  labor  dues,  payments,  and  rents  in  kind  into 
cash  rents  for  land.  The  artizans,  having  been  a  compara- 
tively small  and  favored  section  of  the  lower  class,  were 
able  to  buy  themselves  free  and  go  into  the  towns  where 
trade  and  manufactures  were  centering,  and  where  there 
was  a  growing  demand  for  skilled  and  unskilled  labor. 
Often,  indeed,  evading  all  formality,  serfs  ran  away  in  the 
night;  and  if  they  remained  in  a  chartered  town  "a  year 
and  a  day,"  they  secured  their  freedom  without  ceremony 
(30).  In  a  brief  survey,  the  most  important  thing  to  notice 
is,  not  hoio  the  change  from  the  primitive  system  to  the 
guild  system  came  about,  but  that  it  actually  took  place. 


244  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

Off-hand  statements  about  the  transition  are,  at  best^ 
somewhat  obscure  and  inconsequential. 

It  will  not  do  to  condemn  the  guild  monopoly  on  a 
priori  grounds  evolved  out  of  the  modern  inner  conscious- 
ness. Nor  can  we  justly  criticise  it  adversely  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  later  achievements  of  progress.  Profes- 
sor Gross,  for  instance,  in  his  invaluable  work,  for  which 
we  are  very  grateful,  pronounces  the  guild  monopoly  per- 
nicious. But  we  must  consider  the  circumstances  of  the 
age,  and  the  nature  of  the  evolutionary  process  in  which 
the  guilds  were  involved.  The  landed  nobility  were  domi- 
nant. They  regarded  the  growing  commercial  and  indus- 
trial classes  with  suspicion  and  hostility,  but  were  com- 
pelled to  tolerate  them,  since  their  services  were  indis- 
pensable. They  would  have  been  glad  to  dictate  prices  to 
the  merchants  and  artizans ;  but  the  townsmen,  in  defend- 
ing their  freedom  against  the  nobility,  must,  above  all 
things,  get  the  right  to  have  a  monopoly,  and  to  ^x  prices 
to  those  who  were  formerly  their  masters  and  now  their 
principal  customers.  For  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
trades  were  supported  as  yet,  not  by  the  patronage  of  the 
lower  class,  but  by  the  nobility  (31).  It  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  the  right  to  fix  prices  was  the  most  essential 
element  of  guild  liberty.  It  not  only  secured  the  prac- 
tical independence  of  the  merchants  and  craftsmen;  but, 
as  we  shall  presently  see,  it  helped  them  the  more  speedily 
to  accumulate  capital  and  advance  to  a  position  where  mo- 
nopoly was  no  longer  needed. 

The  following  passage  gives  a  glimpse  of  the  changed 
industrial  conditions  at  this  period : 

"The  great  religious  corporations  and  landowners 
who  had  once  provided  on  their  own  estates  for  all  local 
wants  recognized  the  new  condition  of  things,  and  instead 
of  making  cloth  at  home  as  of  old,  sent  every  year  far  and 
wide  across  the  country  to  the  great  clothing  centers  to 
buy  material  for  their  household  liveries,  seeking  from  one 
place  the  coarse  striped  cloth  of  the  old  pattern  and  from 
another  the  goods  of  the  new  fashion"  (32). 


t 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  245 

§  153. —  At  first  the  free  artizan  had  little  more  in  the 
shape  of  accumulated  capital  than  the  tools  of  his  craft. 
His  labor,  as  a  rule,  was  piece-work.  His  patrons  found 
the  materials,  brought  them  to  him,  and  paid  him  when 
the  work  was  finished  (33). 

But  under  these  conditions  the  craftsmen  began  to  ac- 
cumulate wealth,  and  to  enlarge  their  facilities  (34) 
"One  notable  fact  in  the  economy  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury,'' observes  Eogers,  "is  the  development  of  the  capi- 
talist artisan.  At  a  previous  period  in  the  social  history 
of  England,  this  personage  has  scarcely  an  existence" 
(35).  By  the  time  of  Henry  VII  (1485-1509)  artizans  not 
only  had  the  necessary  capital  for  large  contracts,  but 
they  found  the  materials  as  well.  When  this  point  was 
reached,  the  craftsmen  began  to  turn  into  capitalist  em- 
ployers of  labor  (36). 

We  make  a  serious  mistake  if  we  suppose  the  earlier 
artizans  of  the  towns  to  be  representatives  of  those  whom 
we  call  today  the  "laboring  classes,"  for  the  proletariat  of 
the  towns  and  cities  had  not  at  that  time  come  into  prom- 
inence. Craftsmen,  indeed,  usually  had  one  or  more  as- 
sistants; but  these  workers  expected  to  set  up  for  them- 
selves in  a  few  years,  and  enter  the  guild.  Masters  and 
men  wrought  side  by  side ;  and  there  was  no  social  gulf  be- 
tween them  —  no  struggle  between  capitalists  and 
laborers. 

§  154. —  But  the  merchants  and  artizans  of  the  towns 
were  not  alone  in  securing  enfranchizement  from  serf- 
dom. Along  with  the  changes  that  we  have  been  consid- 
ering, the  entire  lower  class  in  England  emerged  from  the 
condition  wherein  they  were  legally  anchored  to  the  soil. 

The  increase  of  trade  and  manufacture  created  a  de- 
mand for  an  increase  in  the  currency.  At  the  same  time 
strong  governments  with  wide  jurisdictions  were  being 
formed,  which  were  able  to  furnish  the  desired  currency. 
Now  that  money  was  coming  into  general  circulation,  the 
secular  and  ecclesiastical  nobility  began  to  bargain  with 
the  serfs  who  lived  on  their  lands.    Instead  of  a  rent  of 


246  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

labor  products  and  personal  services,  the  nobility  now  be- 
gan to  accept  the  worth  of  these  products  and  services  in 
money.  This  was  more  convenient  for  both  sides.  It  is 
impossible  to  say  when  rents  in  service  and  in  kind  were 
first  commuted  for  cash.  But  in  the  thirteenth  and  four- 
teenth centuries  in  England  the  movement  had  reached 
large  proportions;  and  in  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury (1450)  it  was  practically  complete  throughout  the 
country  (37).  On  the  continent  this  transformation  was 
more  slowly  effected. 

The  change  was  very  important.  On  the  one  hand,  it 
worked  the  extinction  of  serf-slavery.  On  the  other,  it 
went  a  long  way  toward  converting  the  older,  feudal  form 
of  landholding  into  the  present  form  of  that  institution. 

It  did  not,  however,  bring  in  at  once  the  practice  of 
leasing  land  for  the  highest  obtainable  cash  rent.  The  old 
villain  services  were  simply  commuted  for  a  fixed  rent  in 
cash.  After  this  fixed  money  rent  had  been  paid  each  year 
the  "copyholder,"  as  he  was  now  called,  regarded  the  land 
as  his  own.    Of  this  we  shall  see  more  presently. 

§  155. —  And  now  the  movement  of  evolution  carries 
us  forward  another  stage.  By  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth 
century  (1550)  a  great  deal  of  capital  had  been  amassed  in 
the  towns ;  and  this  was  having  a  strange  issue.  Through- 
out England  in  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  the 
older  chartered  towns,  once  the  centers  of  busy  and  pros- 
perous life,  went  into  decay  (38).  The  secret  of  this  re- 
markable fact  was,  that  in  the  presence  of  a  widening 
market,  and  of  the  growing  wealth  which  had  been  ac- 
cumulated under  the  policy  of  monopoly,  the  guild  sys- 
tem, with  its  regulation  of  prices  and  wages  and  hours  of 
work,  had  served  its  day  and  at  last  become  a  barrier  to 
progress.  While  the  old  industrial  centers  were,  in  truth, 
decaying,  industry  itself  was  prosperous,  for  capital  and 
labor  were  leaving  the  chartered  towns  and  establishing 
themselves  in  the  smaller  places  where  the  guilds  had  no 
jurisdiction  (39).     Grass  grew  in  the  streets  of  the  older 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  247 

towns;  and  under  the  stress  of  competition  the  guild  law 
became  a  dead  letter  in  the  places  of  its  origin. 

Then,  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  the 
tide  of  industry,  no  longer  fettered  by  the  older  monopoly, 
surged  back  into  many  of  the  original  chartered  centers; 
and  throughout  all  England,  in  towns  new  and  old,  flowed 
the  currents  of  internal  free  trade,  serving  upper  and 
lower  classes  at  once.  The  guilds  faded  away  into  social 
clubs,  whereof  numbers  are  still  in  existence,  interesting 
survivals  from  conditions  that  have  long  since  passed 
away. 

§  156. —  Accompanying  these  changes  there  came 
gradually  into  existence  what  we  now  term  the  "proleta- 
riat." At  first,  as  we  have  seen,  this  class  had  no  exist- 
ence in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word,  for  masters  and  men 
worked  side  by  side,  and  the  latter  were  admitted  to  the 
guild  in  a  few  years  and  became  head  craftsmen  them- 
selves. But  with  the  expansion  of  the  market,  the  con- 
tinued influx  of  liberated  serfs  from  the  country,  and  the 
transformation  of  the  original  artizans  into  capitalist  em- 
ployers, the  earlier  condition  of  things  prevailed  less  and 
less.  The  guilds  became  exclusive ;  and  it  was  harder  and 
harder  to  obtain  entrance  to  them.  The  craft  guilds, 
which  arose  by  differentiation  from  the  general  guild 
merchant,  are  well  said  to  have  consisted  of  the  aristoc- 
racy of  labor  (40). 

As  an  outcome  of  these  changes,  the  wealthy  mer- 
chants and  manufacturers  engrossed  the  houses  and  land 
of  the  towns,  reaching  out  more  and  more  for  property  in 
the  agricultural  districts.  The  same  element  also  monop- 
olized political  power  in  the  towns.  No  man  could  be  a 
burgess  —  a  full  citizen  with  a  voice  in  the  town  govern- 
ment —  unless  he  were  a  guild  brother  and  a  landowner. 
As  Professor  Ashley  observes, 

"A  part  of  the  inhabitants  which  constantly  tended 
to  become  smaller,  the  ^burgesses'  proper,  held  alike  the 
government  of  the  town  and  the  monopoly  of  trade  to  and 


248  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

from  it.  What  is  true  of  England  is  also  probably  true  of 
the  whole  of  western  Europe"  (41). 

After  the  guilds  had  broken  down  and  lost  their  old 
character,  the  manufacturing  and  mercantile  classes  no 
longer  felt  the  need  of  guild  protection.  They  held  the 
land  and  most  of  the  wealth  in  the  towns ;  and  the  right  to 
vote  was  hedged  about  with  property  qualifications. 

§  157. —  Thus  we  behold  all  over  western  civilization, 
as  in  the  case  of  its  classic  predecessor,  the  marshalling  of 
a  newly  rich  wing  of  the  upper  class.  Under  the  old  sys- 
tem, the  interests  of  this  new  part  of  the  superior  stratum 
were  inevitably  brought  into  opposition  to  those  of  the 
titled  landed  magnates,  which,  as  we  are  bearing  in  mind, 
consisted  of  the  ecclesiastical  and  secular  nobility.  We 
are  now  to  witness  a  three-cornered  fight  between  the 
First,  Second,  and  Third  Estates,  wherefrom  the  latter 
issues  triumphant.  This  fight  convulsed  western  civili- 
zation. In  general,  it  is  known  as  the  Kef ormation ;  but  in 
England  it  passed  into  the  great  Puritan  Revolution, 
which,  although  of  local  scope,  was  of  universal  signifi- 
cance. 

The  popular  idea  is  that  the  Reformation  was  a  theo- 
logical movement  which  turned  upon  questions  that  peo- 
ple do  not  much  trouble  themselves  about  in  the  present 
age.  As  we  shall  try  to  show  in  due  order,  there  is  a  cer- 
tain amount  of  truth  in  this  view;  but  unless  we  are 
astray,  the  conventional  view,  if  unqualified,  is  false  and 
misleading.  The  Reformation  was  more  than  a  theologi- 
cal movement.    It  was  based  on  economic  conditions. 

§  158. —  It  is  plain  that  by  the  beginning  of  the  six- 
teenth century  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  great  as  had 
been  its  evolutionary  value  in  the  Middle  Age,  was  no 
longer  discharging  its  old  functions  in  the  social  economy. 

Throughout  England  and  northern  Europe  especially, 
the  wide  estates  of  the  Church  *in  the  agricultural  dis- 
tricts were  no  longer  the  home  of  manufactures  and  com- 
merce. These  pursuits,  as  we  have  seen,  had  long  been 
gravitating  to  the  towns  that  were  everywhere  growing 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  249 

up.  With  the  rise  of  merchants  and  master-manufactur- 
ers, the  ecclesiastical  monopoly  of  learning  and  education 
passed  away.  The  towns  were  themselves  becoming  the 
training  ground  for  educators  and  administrators. 

At  the  same  time,  the  landed  property  of  the  Church 
was  being  swelled  to  yet  vaster  proportions  by  the  be- 
quests of  well-to-do  persons,  who,  at  the  hour  of  death, 
sought  to  make  secure  the  future  of  their  souls.  The 
holdings  of  religious  corporations  were  also  extended  by 
thrifty  purchases. 

Not  only  were  the  social  functions  of  the  Church  de- 
creasing, and  its  landed  possessions  unduly  increasing; 
but  the  ecclesiastical  wing  of  the  upper  class  was  becom- 
ing identified  with  many  other  evils.  Church  property 
was  usually  exempt  from  the  regular  burdens  of  taxation, 
which  consequently  rested  upon  the  secular  nobility  and 
the  industrial  classes  of  the  towns  with  disproportionate 
and  increasing  weight.  In  addition  to  its  regular  income 
from  the  lower  classes  on  its  own  estates,  the  clerical  no- 
bility was  also  able  to  make  requisition  upon  the  other 
sections  of  society  for  various  church  dues.  Controlling 
the  ecclesiastical  courts,  which  had  a  wide  jurisdiction 
during  the  Middle  Age,  it  was  able  to  reach  the  pockets  of 
great  and  small  in  many  ways  by  process  of  law. 

To  crown  all  these  abuses,  the  streams  of  wealth 
pouring  into  the  hands  of  Roman  bishops,  priests,  and 
monks  were  obviously  being  squandered  in  luxury  and  im- 
morality. 

These  considerations,  together  with  the  subsequent 
history  of  western  civilization,  prove  that  the  Church  was 
coming  into  the  possession  of  more  landed  property  than 
it  ought  to  hold;  and  that  it  was  enjoying  too  much 
wealth  and  power  in  proportion  to  services  rendered.  The 
case  may  perhaps  be  summed  up  as  an  unconscious  error 
in  capitalization. 

Although  the  economic  aspects  of  the  Reformation 
have  not  been  treated  as  they  will  be  in  the  future,  they 
have  not  lacked  extended  notice  by  modern  writers.     In 


250  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  course  of  his  inquiry  into  work  and  wages  in  England, 
Eogers  has  pointed  out  the  association  between  the  rise 
of  commerce  and  the  Reformation  in  the  following  words : 

"It  cannot  be  by  accident  that  those  parts  of  Europe 
which  have  been  from  time  to  time  distinguished  for  man- 
ufacturing and  commercial  activity  have  also  been,  with 
one  exception,  and  that  capable  of  easy  explanation,  gen- 
erally hostile  to  the  pretensions  of  the  Church,  and  that 
they  have,  when  possible,  revolted  from  it.  It  was  so  in 
Toulouse,  before  the  crusade  of  Simon  de  Montfort  wasted 
the  fairest  part  of  France.  It  was  so  in  Flanders  and  Hol- 
land, in  the  Baltic  towns,  in  Scandinavia,  and  in  the  east- 
ern parts  of  England.  It  was  so  in  the  most  industrious 
and  opulent  parts  of  France  in  the  sixteenth  century.  It 
was  not  indeed  so  in  Italy.  It  was  not  in  human  nature 
that  it  should  willingly  quarrel  with  the  process  by  which 
it  became  opulent,  though  in  the  end  it  paid  dearly  for  its 
advantages  .  .  .  Nor  again  can  it  be  by  accident  that 
those  countries  which  have  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  the 
Roman  see  were  and  have  been  most  distinguished  for  in- 
tellectual activity.  The  true  literature  of  modern  Europe 
is  almost  exclusively  the  work  of  those  countries  in  which 
the  Reformation  has  been  finally  settled  —  of  England,  of 
Holland,  of  Northern  Germany"  (42). 

The  Reformation  is  principally  associated  with  the 
sixteenth  century.  But  there  were  more  or  less  distinct 
foreshadowings  of  it  long  before  that  period.  To  go  no 
further  back  than  the  latter  half  of  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury in  England,  we  find  the  forces  gathering  headway 
that  were  destined  to  strike  down  the  Roman  Church  in 
the  most  progressive  countries  of  Europe.  John  Wikliffe 
has  been  called  "The  Morning  Star  of  the  Reformation.'^ 
The  conventional  view  represents  him  as  principally  en- 
gaged in  fighting  for  doctrines  like  those  of  the  sixteenth- 
century  reformers,  and  as  working  for  "the  open  Bible  for 
the  people."  But  this  was  only  one  feature  of  his  cam- 
paign —  and  a  later  feature  at  that.  Emphasis  ought  to 
be  laid  on  the  fact  that  his  preaching  had  an  economic 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  251 

side;  and  that  the  economic  side  came  first.  Mr.  George 
Macaulay  Trevelyan,  who  has  made  a  careful  study  of 
England  in  the  age  of  Wikliffe,  says  of  the  reformer  that 
"his  demand  for  disendowment  preceded  his  purely  doc- 
trinal heresies  .  .  .  ,  while  his  attack  on  the  whole  or- 
ganization and  the  most  prominent  doctrines  of  the  Medi- 
aeval Church  is  found  in  its  fulness  only  in  his  later 
works"  (43).  Wikliffe  was  a  professor  in  Oxford  Uni- 
versity; and  was  accounted  the  greatest  scholar  of  his 
time.  In  his  book,  "De  Dominio  Civili,"  he  argued  for  the 
secularization  of  Church  property.  A  passage  from  his 
writings  may  be  fitly  introduced  here,  giving  his  economic 
position  in  his  own  words,  a  few  terms  being  modernized. 

"Secular  lordships  that  ecclesiastics  have  full  falsely 
against  God's  law  and  spend  them  so  wickedly,  should  be 
given  by  the  King  and  wise  lords  to  poor  gentlemen,  that 
would  justly  govern  the  people,  and  maintain  the  land 
against  enemies.  And  then  might  our  land  be  stronger  by 
many  thousand  men  of  arms  than  it  is  now,  without  any 
new  cost  of  lords,  or  taxation  of  the  poor  commons,  and  be 
discharged  of  great  heavy  rent,  and  wicked  customs 
brought  up  by  covetous  ecclesiastics,  and  of  many  taxes 
and  extortions  by  which  they  be  now  cruelly  pillaged  and 
robbed"  (44). 

Two  noblemen  that  stood  near  the  English  throne^ 
John  of  Gaunt  and  Lord  Percy,  invited  Wikliffe  to  Lon- 
don to  advocate  the  cause  of  Church  disendowment  under 
their  patronage.  John  of  Gaunt,  the  Duke  of  Lancaster, 
was  a  son  of  the  reigning  King,  the  famous  Edward  IIL 
His  reformatory  zeal  was  inspired  by  the  hope  that  he  and 
his  noble  friends  might  obtain  some  of  the  Church  prop- 
erty. 

But  the  Duke  of  Lancaster  was  doomed  to  disappoint- 
ment. The  demand  for  change  was  at  that  time  prema- 
ture and  weak.  The  Church  party,  by  an  astute  use  of  its 
wealth  and  influence,  was  able  to  maintain  its  position  for 
many  years  thereafter. 


■252  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

The  secular  wing  of  the  upper  class,  however,  did  not 
wait  until  the  sixteenth  century  before  taking  positive  ac- 
tion of  some  kind.  Although  the  lay  princes  did  not  ven- 
ture to  seize  the  vast  landed  estates  of  the  Church  during 
the  early  period  of  the  agitation  against  it,  they  passed 
laws  in  many  countries  of  Europe  restricting  the  right  of 
the  ecclesiastical  nobility  to  acquire  additional  property. 
English  experience  in  respect  of  this  matter  is  given  by 
Blackstone  in  his  Commentaries  on  the  Laws  of  England, 
from  which  we  cite  a  suggestive  passage : 

"Alienation  in  mortmain  .  .  .  is  an  alienation  of 
lands  or  tenements  to  any  corporation,  sole  or  aggregate, 
ecclesiastical  or  temporal.  But  these  purchases  having 
been  made  by  religious  houses,  in  consequence  whereof  the 
lands  became  perpetually  inherent  in  one  dead  hand,  this 
hath  occasioned  the  general  appelation  of  mortmain  to  be 
applied  to  such  alienations,  and  the  religious  houses  them- 
selves to  be  principally  considered  in  forming  the  statutes 
of  mortmain ;  in  deducing  the  history  of  which  statutes,  it 
will  be  matter  of  curiosity  to  observe  the  great  address 
and  subtle  contrivance  of  ecclesiastics  in  eluding  from 
time  to  time  the  laws  in  being,  and  the  zeal  with  which 
successive  parliaments  have  pursued  them  through  all 
their  finesses :  how  new  remedies  were  still  the  parents  of 
new  evasions;  till  the  legislature  at  last,  though  with  dif- 
ficulty, hath  obtained  a  decisive  victory"  (45). 

It  availed  but  little  to  pass  laws  against  the  extension 
of  Church  property ;  and  the  problem  was  not  to  be  solved 
in  this  fashion. 

The  merchants  and  artizans  of  the  towns  reacted  more 
and  more  against  the  Roman  Church.  "The  instinct  of 
self-interest,"  says  the  historian  Motley,  "sharpens  the  eye 
of  the  public.  Many  greedy  priests  of  lower  rank  had 
turned  shopkeepers  in  the  Netherlands,  and  were  growing 
Tich  by  selling  their  wares,  exempt  from  taxation,  at  a 
lower  rate  than  lay  hucksters  could  afford.  The  benefit  of 
clergy  thus  taking  the  bread  from  the  mouths  of  many  ex- 
cites jealousy,  the  more  so  as,  besides  their  miscellaneous 


I 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  25S 

business,  the  reverend  traders  have  a  most  lucrative 
branch  of  commerce  from  which  other  merchants  are  ex- 
cluded.^ The  sale  of  absolution  [for  sin]  was  the  source  of 
large  fortunes  to  the  priests.  The  enormous  impudence  of 
this  traffic  almost  exceeds  belief  (46). 

Not  only  were  the  mercantile  and  manufacturing  peo- 
ple thus  alienated  from  the  ecclesiastical  section  of  the 
upper  class ;  but  the  secular  nobility,  as  already  suggested 
by  the  reference  to  John  of  Gaunt,  were  becoming  more 
and  more  hostile.  In  the  transition  period  leading  out 
from  the  Middle  Age  into  modern  times,  the  fortunes  of 
the  secular  nobility  were,  indeed,  at  a  low  ebb.  Their 
property,  as  we  have  seen,  consisted  of  agricultural  estates 
intermingled  over  the  country  with  those  of  the  Church. 
They  were  already  over-taxed  as  compared  with  their 
brothers  the  Church  magnates ;  and  it  was  becoming  more 
and  more  difficult  for  them  to  procure,  from  those  who 
held  their  lands,  enough  money  to  exchange  with  the  city 
merchants  and  manufacturers  for  the  necessaries  of  life. 
By  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  century  in  England  the 
older  land  rents,  consisting  of  personal  services  and  pay- 
ments in  kind,  had  been  commuted  into  their  cash  equiv- 
alents. But  although  land  values  were  undoubtedly  ris- 
ing, it  was  difficult  for  the  nobility  to  increase  their  money 
rents  along  with  the  increase  of  their  expenses.  These 
rents  represented  old  customs ;  and  they  were  supposed  to 
be  fixed  and  incapable  of  development.  To  increase  them 
would  be  to  provoke  an  inconvenient  uprising.  The  mod- 
ern practice  of  renting  land  for  the  highest  obtainable 
price  was  unknown,  for  there  was  as  yet  no  general  com- 
petition among  tenants.  Thus  it  is  that  about  this  time  we 
begin  to  hear  apparently  inconsistent,  but  really  well 
founded,  accounts  of  "poor  nobles.'' 

It  was  easier  for  the  "poor  nobles"  to  quarrel  among 
themselves  for  each  others  lands  than  to  put  the  screws 
on  their  tenants;  and  this  they  did  before  the  secular  ele- 
ments of  the  upper  class  finally  united  against  the  Church. 
In  the  fifteenth  century  the  descendants  of  John  of  Gaunt^ 


254  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

the  Duke  of  Lancaster,  engaged  in  a  civil  war  with  an- 
other family,  the  house  of  York,  also  descended  from  Ed- 
ward III,  John's  father.  The  struggle  between  the  houses 
of  Lancaster  and  York  is  known  in  history  under  the  flow- 
ery title  "The  Wars  of  the  Koses.''  One  side  had  the  red 
rose  as  its  emblem ;  the  other  the  white.  The  objects  of  the 
contestants  were  the  crown  of  England,  control  of  the  na- 
tional taxing  power,  and  possession  of  each  others  estates. 
One  result  of  these  conflicts  was  that  the  older,  secular  no- 
bility was  largely  reduced  in  numbers.  At  the  conclusion 
of  the  Wars  of  the  Roses,  King  Henry  VII  could  find  only 
twenty-nine  secular  lords  to  sit  in  the  upper  house  of  the 
first  parliament  of  his  reign. 

Altogether,  it  is  no  matter  for  wonder  when  we  see  the 
titled  and  untitled  secular  upper  class  turning  from  the 
timid  mediaeval  policy  of  restricting  clerical  estates  to  the 
bolder  sixteenth  century  policy  of  confiscating  Church 
lands  wholesale.  "The  religious  reformation  in  every 
land  of  Europe,"  says  Motley,  "derived  a  portion  of  its 
strength  from  the  opportunity  it  afforded  to  potentates 
and  great  nobles  for  helping  themselves  to  Church  prop- 
erty" (47). 

The  English  Reformation  began  in  the  reign  of  Henry 
the  Eighth  (1509-1547).  In  his  time  the  pressure  for  eco- 
nomic change  became  too  great  to  be  resisted.  Successive 
confiscations  transferred  the  vast  English  property  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  into  the  hands  of  the  King,  and 
thence  in  large  part  to  the  secular  upper  class.  Green 
writes  as  follows: 

"The  bulk  of  these  possessions  were  granted  lavishly 
away  to  the  nobles  and  courtiers  about  the  King,  and  to  a 
liost  of  adventurers  who  ^had  become  gospellers  for  the 
abbey  lands.'  Something  like  a  fifth  of  the  actual  land  in 
the  kingdom  was  in  this  way  transferred  from  the  holding 
of  the  Church  to  that  of  the  nobles  and  gentry.  Not  only 
were  the  older  houses  enriched,  but  a  new  aristocracy 
was  erected  from  among  the  dependants  of  the  Court.  The 
Russells  and  the  Cavendishes  are  familiar  instances  of 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  255 

families  which  rose  from  obscurity  through  the  enormous 
grants  of  Church-land  made  to  Henry's  courtiers"  (48). 

So  far  as  England  was  directly  concerned,  the  final 
drama  of  the  Reformation  centered  around  a  great  sea 
battle  forever  famous  in  history.  Philip  II  of  Spain  was 
the  successor  of  that  Charles  who  was  elected  Emperor  of 
Germany,  and  who  outlawed  the  German  reformer,  Martin 
Luther,  at  the  Diet  of  Worms.  With  the  good  will  and 
sanction  of  the  Pope,  King  Philip  gathered  an  immense 
fleet,  the  great  Spanish  Armada,  and  prepared  to  send  it 
against  the  heretical  island.  Among  other  projects,  his 
plan  was  to  reduce  the  country  to  a  Spanish  dependency, 
restore  to  the  Roman  Church  its  confiscated  possessions, 
and  re-establish  the  "true  faith."  English  Jesuits  assured 
Philip  that  the  English  Catholics  were  waiting  for  him, 
and  would  support  him  in  force  against  Queen  Elizabeth 
as  soon  as  the  Spanish  fleet  appeared  off  the  coast.  But 
when  the  Great  Armada  came  sailing  up  the  Channel,  and 
beacon  fires  blazed  up  by  thousands  all  over  the  island, 
the  English  Catholics  joined  their  countrymen  against  the 
foreigner.  As  Green  well  says,  "England  became  Prot- 
estant in  heart  and  soul  when  Protestantism  became  iden- 
tified with  patriotism"  (49). 

§  159. —  As  to  the  religious,  or  spiritual,  aspects  of  the 
Reformation,  there  is  much  to  be  said ;  but  we  can  refer  to 
this  phase  of  the  subject  only  by  the  way.  When  Chris- 
tianity became  the  religion  of  the  barbarians  in  the  fifth 
century  after  Christ,  it  accommodated  itself  to  minds  on 
a  lower  level  of  culture  than  those  in  which  the  Christian 
faith,  and  its  parent,  Judaism,  had  been  developed.  As  a 
result  of  this,  and  without  blame  on  the  part  of  anybody, 
the  Roman  Catholic  system  in  the  Middle  Age  was  barbar- 
ous and  superstitious.  The  intellectual  pitch  of  Catholi- 
cism in  early  western  civilization  was  necessarily  far  below 
that  of  the  prophetic  spirit,  which,  from  Amos  and  Isaiah 
to  Jesus,  had  been  associated,  not  with  barbarism,  but 
with  civilization.    The  progress  of  culture  in  western  so- 


256  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ciety,  bringing  it  up  to  the  level  of  the  ancient  civilization, 
made  inevitable  a  doctrinal  readjustment  of  some  kind. 

But  the  Eeformation  was  not  a  "ghost-dance  on  a 
floor  of  clouds."  A  doctrinal  and  spiritual  change  would, 
indeed,  have  been  a  reformation;  but  it  would  not  have 
been  the  Eeformation  that  actually  took  place.  The 
actual,  historical  Reformation  was  accompanied  by  a  vast 
confiscation  of  Church  property,  and  by  other  great  eco- 
nomic changes.  It  convulsed  Europe  for  many  years  in 
wars  that  cost  millions  of  lives.  These  conflicts  were  not 
fought  over  airy  doctrines.  They  had  a  materialistic 
basis;  and  the  doctrines  were  the  flags,  or  badges,  that 
distinguished  the  antagonists. 

§  160. —  The  Reformation  restored  the  economic  bal- 
ance of  society.  It  did  not  effect  the  political  enfranchize- 
ment  of  the  Third  Estate;  and  this  part  of  the  growth  of 
western  civilization  was  a  long  process  beginning  before, 
and  continuing  after,  the  Reformation.  In  the  transfer 
of  the  basis  of  the  State  from  family  to  property,  England 
led  the  way.  The  other  western  powers  have  built  their 
governments  after  her  model,  showing  that  England 
merely  gave  expression  to  universal  forces. 

After  England  had  been  freed  from  ecclesiastical  dom- 
ination, she  was  gradually  driven  into  a  struggle  with  the 
arbitrary  power  of  the  Crown.  The  Tudor  family  had 
been  succeeded  by  the  Stuarts ;  and  this  family  attempted 
to  tax  and  govern  the  nation  at  their  own  pleasure. 

The  first  of  the  Stuarts  to  inherit  the  English  crown 
was  James  VI  of  Scotland,  or  James  I  of  England.  Be- 
fore assuming  his  new  principality,  he  had  struggled  with 
the  Scotch  lords  on  behalf  of  national  authority  against 
their  local,  feudal  independence;  and  his  idea  of  the  di- 
vine right  of  kings  was  ver^^  high.  The  changes  intro- 
duced into  Scotland  by  the  Reformation  had  also  contrib- 
uted to  make  James  equally  arbitrary  in  matters  of  relig- 
ion. The  retention  of  their  independent  character  so  far 
into  modern  times  by  the  Scotch  lords  is  one  aspect  of  the 
backwardness  of  social  development  in  the  Scotland  of 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  257 

that  period.  Owing  largely  to  the  nature  and  position  of 
the  country,  the  currents  of  commerce  had  not  circulated 
as  freely  as  in  England.  There  was  a  national  congress, 
or  parliament;  but  the  kings  had  summoned  only  the 
secular  and  ecclesiastical  nobility  to  it.  At  the  time  of 
the  Keformation,  the  Scotch  lords,  like  the  secular  nobility 
elsewhere,  had  appropriated  the  local  estates  of  the  Eo- 
man  Church.  The  exclusion  of  the  trading  classes  from  a 
voice  in  the  Scotch  government  threw  them  into  an  oppo- 
sition which  drew  the  peasantry  with  it.  The  rise  of  the 
Scotch  Kirk,  with  its  National  Assembly,  gave  the  people 
an  organ  through  which  to  express  their  opinions  and 
grievances  in  matters  of  economics  and  politics.  Here, 
again,  religion  acted  as  a  rallying  point  for  society,  and  as 
a  disguise  for  economic  movements.  "It  is  the  Scotch 
people,"  says  Green,  "that  rises  into  being  under  the  guise 
of  the  Scotch  Kirk"  (50). 

It  was  with  a  temper  hardened  by  his  conflicts  with 
the  Scotch  lords  and  the  Scotch  Kirk  that  James  came  to 
take  the  English  crown.  The  struggle  of  Puritanism 
against  the  arbitrary  policies  of  the  Stuarts,  although 
flavored  with  religion,  was  fundamentally  economic. 

The  difference  between  the  political  history  of  Eng- 
land and  that  of  the  continental  states  has  been  unduly 
emphasized  by  many  writers.  The  English  Parliament 
has  been  referred  to  as  a  peculiar  creation  of  the  national 
genius,  whereby  the  liberties  of  "the  people"  were  pre- 
served at  a  time  when  the  governments  of  the  rest  of  Eu- 
rope were  arbitrarily  controlled  by  monarchy  and  aris- 
tocracy. But  in  the  very  century  in  which  the  English 
Parliament  assumed  its  characteristic  form  similar  bodies 
were  convoked  in  Spain,  France,  Germany  and  Sicily.  The 
evolution  of  continental  parliaments  was,  however, 
checked  for  a  time  by  local  circumstances  which  it  is  not 
here  essential  to  notice.  The  growth  of  the  English  Par- 
liament at  a  period  in  which  no  similar  institution  could 
thrive  in  Europe  at  large  was  likewise  based  on  peculiar- 
17 


258  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ities  in  the  social  history  of  Britain.  The  difference  be- 
tween the  political  development  of  England  and  that  of 
the  other  progressive  states  of  Europe  has  been  more  a 
matter  of  form  than  of  substance.  England,  equally  with 
Europe,  has  illustrated  the  overshadowing  law  of  cleav- 
age. The  Upper  House  of  the  English  Parliament,  or 
House  of  Lords,  has  always  been  upper-class  in  substance 
and  name.  And  until  the  nineteenth  century  the  so-called 
Lower  House,  or  House  of  Commons,  included  no  repre- 
sentatives from  the  economic  lower  class.  "The  two 
Houses,'^  writes  Bagehot,  "were  not  in  their  essence  dis- 
tinct, they  were  in  their  essence  similar,  they  Avere,  in  the 
main,  not  Houses  of  contrasted  origin,  but  Houses  of  like 
origin.  The  prominent  party  of  both  was  taken  from  the 
same  class  —  from  the  English  gentry,  titled  and  un- 
titled" (51).  In  the  seventeenth  century  the  Lower 
House  consisted  of  representatives  from  the  lesser  landed 
aristocracy  throughout  the  country  districts,  and  of  repre- 
sentatives from  the  commercial  and  manufacturing  upper 
class  in  the  towns.  In  substance  it  was  practically  as 
aristocratic  as  the  House  of  Lords. 

With  the  grudging  consent  of  English  kings  and  lords, 
the  principle  had  been  established  that  the  House  of  Com- 
mons should  have  control  over  all  money  bills. 

This  principle,  however,  had  been  established  more 
in  theory  than  in  practice.  The  idea  still  prevailed 
throughout  western  civilization  as  a  whole  that  the  gov- 
ernment of  society  belonged  of  right  to  ancient  noble  fam- 
ilies, to  be  exercised  at  their  discretion.  The  English 
royal  and  noble  families,  as  just  observed,  had  been  slow  to 
admit  the  power  of  the  House  of  Commons  over  taxation 
and  other  affairs  of  government;  and  in  the  seventeenth 
century  after  Christ  the  struggle  between  the  Clan  State 
and  the  Property  State,  which  had  been  fought  out  on 
Roman  soil  by  the  patricians  and  plebeians,  was  at  length 
brought  to  an  issue  on  the  soil  of  England.  The  Clan 
State  was  powerful  enough  in  seventeenth-century  Eng- 
land to  make  a  great  struggle  for  supremacy.      On  the 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  259 

side  of  Charles  I,  the  son  of  James,  were  most  of  the  no- 
bility of  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  other  landowning 
classes  in  the  country  districts,  including  large  numbers 
of  the  constituents  of  the  House  of  Commons.  On  the  side 
of  the  Commons  were  some  of  the  landowning  classes  in 
the  country  districts  and  practically  all  of  the  upper 
classes  in  the  towns  (52).  Looking  back  on  the  struggle 
from  this  distance  in  time,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  the  burden 
of  the  Parliamentary  fight  against  the  king  was  borne  by 
the  towns.  The  country  upper  class  might,  and  actually 
did,  differ  among  themselves  touching  the  wisdom  of  ar- 
bitrary monarehial  government;  but  it  was  the  aristoc- 
racy of  London  and  the  other  towns,  together  with  the 
population  dependent  upon  them,  that  turned  the  scales. 
Mr.  Lecky  well  says  that  just  as,  at  the  time  of  the  Kefor- 
mation,  the  towns  were  the  strongholds  of  Protestantism, 
so,  at  the  time  of  the  reaction  against  the  Monarchy,  the 
towns  were  the  strongholds  of  Puritanism  (53).  If  it  had 
not  been  for  the  wealth  and  industry  accumulated  in  the 
towns,  it  would  seem  that  the  government  of  England  at 
this  period,  like  those  of  Spain  and  France,  must  have  be- 
come a  central  despotism. 

Professor  Gardiner,  in  writing  of  the  period  which  he 
has  made  his  own,  rounds  out  our  view  by  saying  suggest- 
ively that  "Puritanism  had  no  deep  hold  in  the  minds  of 
the  agricultural  poor''  —  that  is,  the  rustic  lower  class, 
which  worked  the  soil  of  England  without  owning  it ;  and 
he  adds  that  "they  wanted  to  be  let  alone  that  they  might 
be  allowed  to  earn  their  daily  bread  in  peace"  (54).  It 
should  be  emphasized,  indeed,  that  this  great  civil  struggle 
of  the  seventeenth  century  was  an  upper-class  conflict ;  and 
that  it  did  not  secure  political  rights  for  the  lower,  un- 
propertied  class  either  in  town  or  country. 

§  161. —  Having  glanced  at  the  Reformation  and  Puri- 
tanism, we  must  now  take  some  notice  of  the  conditions 
leading  directly  to  the  overflow  of  European  society  upon 
the  soil  of  the  New  World. 


260  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

We  have  seen  that  by  the  middle  of  the  fifteenth  cen- 
tury the  increasing  use  of  money  had  led  to  the  transfor- 
mation into  cash  rents  of  the  older  personal  services  and 
payments  in  kind  rendered  by  the  lower  class.  From  serfs 
who  had  held  plots  of  land  on  villan  tenure,  and  been 
bound  to  the  soil  by  law,  there  had  sprung,  by  the  middle 
of  the  fifteenth  century,  an  order  of  "yeomen,"  or  small 
farmers.  The  yeomen,  it  must  be  carefully  noted,  did  not 
hold  their  farms  in  absolute  ownership.  They  paid  a 
money  rent  to  the  large  landed  proprietors  out  of  whose 
estates  their  holdings  were  carved;  but  their  farms  were 
deemed  by  custom  to  be  theirs  to  pass  on  from  father  to 
son.  It  should  be  noted  with  equal  care  that  the  yeomen 
were  not  coextensive  with  the  lower  class.  They  sprang 
from  those  of  the  lower  class  who  were  fortunate  enough 
to  possess  agricultural  holdings  at  the  period  in  which  the 
commutation  of  the  older  villan  services  into  money  rents 
was  taking  place.  Their  rents,  which,  as  we  have  seen, 
were  at  first  fixed  in  amount,  fell  further  and  further  be- 
low the  true  rent,  or  absolute  worth  of  the  land  they  held. 
As  population  multiplied,  increasing  the  number  of  poor 
and  landless  laborers,  it  is  evident  that  the  yeomen  were 
thus  put  more  and  more  into  the  position  of  small  monop- 
olists who  held  title  to  the  earth  as  against  the  property- 
less  classes.  In  Bishop  Latimer's  first  sermon  before  Ed- 
ward VI  we  obtain  an  interesting  glimpse  of  the  yeo- 
manry, and  of  the  propertyless  classes  which  everywhere 
existed  and  multiplied  alongside  of  them.  He  states  that 
his  father  was  a  yeoman,  and  held  a  farm  for  a  small 
rental ;  that  he  had  a  hundred  sheep  and  thirty  cows ;  that 
he  was  able  to  keep  in  school  the  boy  who  afterward  be- 
came Bishop  Latimer ;  that  he  gave  each  of  his  daughters 
a  goodly  sum  when  they  were  married;  that  he  employed 
six  laborers ;  and  that  he  was  hospitable  to  his  poor  neigh- 
bors (55).  The  yeomen  had,  in  fact,  acquired  a  minor  in- 
terest in  the  land  monopoly  of  the  country;  and,  like  all 
small  monopolists,  they  were  doomed  to  be  crushed  out. 
Their  lands  were  increasing  in  value,  but  were  not  being 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  261 

put  to  the  most  efficient  use,  and  were  yielding  neither 
rental  nor  taxation  on  their  true  value. 

In  the  midst  of  these  conditions  the  merchants  and 
manufacturers  of  the  towns  began  more  and  more  to  put 
their  surplus  wealth  into  landed  estates  in  the  agricul- 
tural districts.  They  either  bought  out  the  landlords,  or 
leased  of  them  at  higher  figures  than  the  yeomanry  were 
paying.  As  a  result,  many  of  the  small  farmers  were 
evicted  from  their  customary  holdings.  In  describing  this 
change.  Green  says  that  the  merchant  classes  "began  to  in- 
vest largely  in  land,  and  .  .  .  were  restrained  by  few 
traditions  or  associations  in  their  eviction  of  the  smaller 
tenants.  The  land  indeed  had  been  greatly  underlet,  and 
as  its  value  rose  with  the  peace  and  firm  government  of  the 
early  Tudors  the  temptation  to  raise  the  customary  rents 
became  irresistible"  (56).  The  fact  is,  that  a  change  in 
landholding  was  inevitable.  When  we  consider  the  im- 
mense revolutions  with  which  modern  history  opens,  both 
in  State  and  Church,  and  the  dense  ignorance  of  the  age 
concerning  social  laws,  it  is  plain  that  great  suffering  was 
as  inevitable  as  great  change. 

The  yeomen  were  not  all  evicted  at  the  same  time. 
Large  numbers  were  thrust  out  in  the  first  half  of  the  six- 
teenth century  (1500-1550).  But  perhaps  the  majority  of 
them  were  able,  with  economy,  to  pay  the  increased  rental 
demanded  of  them.  We  know  that  Bishop  Latimer's 
father,  who  had  paid  four  pounds  per  year  at  the  most, 
was  replaced  by  a  man  who  paid  the  landlord  sixteen 
pounds  annually  (57);  and  this  increase  was  not  unusual. 
Prices  of  agricultural  products  rose  during  the  last  half  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  affording  the  farmers  temporary 
relief. 

But  in  the  first  half  of  the  seventeenth  century  rents 
began  once  more  to  advance.  All  the  good  lands  near  the 
more  settled  parts  of  the  country  had  been  enclosed  and 
reduced  to  private  property  by  this  time;  and  the  poorer 
yeomen  began  to  think  about  leaving  England  for  other 
parts.    It  was  but  natural  that  they  should  become  Puri- 


262  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

tans.  Politics  and  religion  were  united.  King  James,  who 
had  struggled  with  the  Scotch  people  when  they  took  the 
guise  of  the  Scotch  Kirk,  declared  that  all  the  people  of 
England  should  be  made  to  conform  to  the  Anglican  Prot- 
estant Church,  and  to  support  its  priests.  "I  will  make 
the  Puritans  conform!''  he  exclaimed,  when  outlining  the 
religious  phase  of  his  policy.  "And  if  they  will  not  con- 
form," added  the  King,  "I  will  harry  them  out  of  the 
land!"  Anglicanism  in  religion  came  to  be  associated 
with  the  policy  of  taxing  and  governing  at  the  monarch's 
pleasure;  and  it  is  not  strange  that  the  Puritan  migra- 
tion from  England  assumed  the  religious  form.  In  1607  a 
small  congregation  of  yeomen,  centering  in  the  little  vil- 
lage of  Scrooby  in  Nottinghamshire,  set  sail  for  Hol- 
land. On  the  Continent,  however,  they  found  that  indus- 
'  trial  conditions  were  as  hard  as  in  their  old  home.  It  be- 
came evident  that  they  could  find  no  satisfactory  abiding 
place  in  Europe ;  and  in  1620  they  sailed  away  in  the  little 
ship  Mayflower  to  the  New  World. 

Had  it  not  been  for  the  outlet  afforded  by  the  opening 
of  America  at  this  period,  it  is  likely  that  western  civiliza- 
tion would  more  quickly  have  developed  the  modern  social 
problem.  The  unused  land  of  Europe  was  being  rapidly 
appropriated;  and  lacking  the  great  American  safety- 
valve,  the  like  of  which  no  earlier  society  in  an  equal  state 
of  culture  had  enjoyed,  there  is  little  doubt  that  the  third 
great  civilization  of  history,  like  its  classic  and  oriental 
predecessors,  would  long  ago  have  degenerated,  and  per- 
ished under  a  flood  of  barbarism. 

§  162. —  The  relation  of  the  principle  of  cleavage- 
capitalization  to  the  discovery,  settlement  and  growth  of 
America  is  obscured  both  by  the  individualistic  psychology 
common  to  all  societies,  and  by  the  economic  conditions 
under  which  the  social  development  of  America  has  taken 
place.  The  same  naive  conceptions  of  American  history 
seem  to  lie  alike  in  the  mind  of  the  school  boy,  the  Fourth- 
of-July  orator,  the  platform  lecturer,  the  plain  citizen, 
and  the  majority  of  educated  persons.     If  you  ask  your 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  263 

neighbor  about  the  facts,  the  same  answer  is  almost  in- 
variably elicited.  America,  says  the  tradition,  was  col- 
onized by  people  who  were  seeking  an  opportunity  to  prac- 
tice religion  after  the  dictates  of  their  own  consciences. 
The  tradition  yields  nothing  more  than  vague  ideas  about 
"people  who  came  over,"  like  men  who  cross  from  one  side 
of  the  street  to  the  other.  The  colonial  period,  beginning 
in  the  sixteenth  century,  has  already  sunk  to  the  level  of 
dim,  ancient  history.  The  popular  mind  is  intellectually 
too  sluggish  to  inquire  into  the  vital  facts  underlying  the 
relations  of  America  to  Europe  and  to  earlier  society  in 
general.  American  history,  to  the  popular  mind,  began 
in  the  New  World.  It  is  admitted  that  there  is  a  histori- 
cal connection  of  some  kind  between  America  and  the  Old 
World ;  but  that  connection  is  mostly  thought  of  under  its 
conventional  form,  not  in  its  vital  substance.  The  tra- 
dition tells  us  about  "people  who  came  over''  in  search  of 
religious  liberty.  The  descendants  of  these  people  were 
oppressed  by  a  British  King,  and  revolted  from  his  des- 
potic rule.  They  set  up  a  government,  so  the  tradition 
runs,  under  which  all  men  were  and  are  free  and  equal. 
We  are  assured  that  the  American  people,  owing  either  to 
peculiar  virtues  of  their  own,  or  to  the  blessing  of  God,  or 
both,  have  been  and  are  happier  than  any  other  people  on 
earth.  And  it  must  be  confessed  that  the  scholarly  treat- 
ment of  the  subject  has  been  controlled  more  by  conven- 
tional, individualistic,  easy-going  views  than  by  concep- 
tions arising  out  of  an  inductive  examination  of  society  at 
large. 

Looking  at  America  from  the  standpoint  of  our  guid- 
ing conception,  the  facts  take  on  a  different  aspect  from 
that  which  they  bear  in  the  popular  traditions.  American 
society  is  a  part  of  western  civilization,  modified  by  the 
physical  environment  of  the  New  World ;  and  it  is  not  es- 
sentially different  from  society  in  England,  France,  and 
Germany.  Its  history  began  in  western  and  central 
Europe,,  and  around  the  northern  and  eastern  shores 
of   the   Mediterranean,   as   well   as   in    prehistoric  ages. 


AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


It  affords  no  more  illustration  of  individualism  than 
any  other  part  of  human  society;  and  regarded  from 
the  cosmic  standpoint,  American  social  development 
bears  witness  to  the  same  law  of  capitalization  that  we 
have  hitherto  traced  in  prehistoric,  ancient,  mediaeval,  and 
modern  times. 

The  discovery  of  America  was  itself  a  capitalized 
achievement,  both  from  the  material  and  from  the  spir- 
itual standpoint.  The  story  of  Columbus  is  familiar;  but 
we  hardly  pause  to  think  of  the  significant  fact  that  his 
great  voyage  of  discovery  was  made  on  the  basis  of  a  mass 
of  capital  in  the  form  of  ships,  metal  and  wooden  imple- 
ments, food  supplies  for  a  long  period,  etc.  (58).  The  less 
famous  voyages  of  discovery  and  exploration  that  were 
made  in  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  represent  a 
jarge  outlay  of  wealth. 

Turning  to  the  settlement  of  the  country,  we  natur- 
ally recur  to  the  first  Pilgrim  congregation.  We  find  that 
these  people  obtained  from  seventy  upper-class  merchants 
a  loan  of  7,000  English  pounds,  wherewith  to  purchase 
transportation  facilities  and  supplies  (59).  When  we 
think  of  the  Pilgrims,  we  imagine  them,  under  the  forms 
of  individualism,  simply  as  "people  who  crossed  the 
ocean;''  and  we  forget,  or  ignore,  the  social  capital  of  all 
kinds,  material  and  intangible,  without  which  their  enter- 
l^rize  would  have  been  a  failure.  And  so  of  American  col- 
onization as  a  whole.  European  immigration  to  America 
flowed  out  from  a  society  which  had  been  raised  from  no- 
madic barbarism  into  a  settled  economy  wherein  a  vast  and 
various  mass  of  social  capital  had  been  rolled  up  across 
fifteen  centuries  and  more  of  cleavage.  European  immi- 
gration to  America  has  brought  the  Past  Avith  it  across 
the  Atlantic.  It  avails  nothing  to  declare  that  if  the  emi- 
grants had  been  previously  permitted  to  work  under  con- 
ditions of  industrial  freedom  and  individualism  they  could 
have  produced  suflftcient  capital  with  which  to  colonize 
America.  Such  a  thought  is  wholly  beside  the  question. 
The  Pilgrim  fathers  themselves  upheld  private  property  in 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  266 

land,  the  second  historical  basis  of  cleavage;  and  the  idea 
of  individualism  is  only  a  passing  dream. 

What  would  have  been  the  fate  of  all  European  emi- 
grants to  America  if  they  had  been  deprived  of  the  capital 
with  which  the  great  enterprize  has  been  accomplished? 
Before  answering  this  question,  it  is  necessary  to  inquire 
further  what  it  would  mean  to  deprive  European  emigrants 
of  capital.  It  would  mean  simply  reduction  to  the  savage 
level  or  lower.  All  their  material  and  spiritual  capital 
would  be  taken  from  them.  They  would  be  deprived  of 
-ships,  metal  implements,  guns,  gunpowder,  food  supplies 
in  store,  the  accumulated  knowledge  of  generations,  co- 
operative training  and  habits  of  thought.  If  the  emigrants 
had  succeeded  in  crossing  the  ocean,  it  would  merely  have 
been  another  case  of  barbarian  against  barbarian,  savage 
against  savage;  and  we  are  familiar  with  results  under 
such  conditions.  In  the  actual  course  of  history,  capital- 
ized European  immigration  to  America  has  pushed  the 
Indian  brother  aside  like  one  of  the  lower  animals,  and 
-entered  into  his  heritage.  When  the  Israelites  conquered 
Canaan,  they  intermarried  with  the  Canaanites,  and  re- 
duced many  of  them  to  the  lower  class.  But  the  social 
distance  between  western  civilization  and  Indian  barbar- 
ism has  been  so  great  that  the  Indian  could  not  perma- 
nently compete  against  the  white  man,  even  in  the  lower 
class!  The  closer  we  look  into  the  subject,  the  plainer 
•does  it  become  that  the  forces  of  organized  society  in  the 
Old  World  prepared  the  way,  under  the  direction  of  the 
Tipper  class,  for  the  overflow  of  western  civilization  into 
America;  and  that  the  settlement  of  the  population  has 
been  accomplished  at  every  stage  with  the  help  of  material 
and  intangible  capital  accumulated  through  cleavage. 

We  must  notice  more  fully  the  relation  of  cleavage  to 
the  development  of  America.  From  the  sixteenth  century 
onward  the  stream  of  immigration  to  the  New  World  has 
I)een  derived  from  upper  and  lower  classes,  although  more 
of  course  from  the  lower.  Early  colonial  society  was  cap- 
italized by  European  commercial  companies,  and  by  indi- 


266  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

vidual  wealthy  persons.  Many  wealthy  persons,  indeed^ 
came  over  in  the  hope  of  increasing  their  fortunes  by  trade 
with  Europe.  Social  distinctions  were  in  evidence  from 
the  first.  Slavery  flourished  from  Florida  to  Maine.  Ne- 
groes were  imported  mostly  into  the  south.  In  the  north- 
ern colonies  the  lower  class  was  more  mixed.  Indians  and 
negroes  were  used;  but  the  Indians  were  more  numerous, 
and  the  negroes  fewer,  than  at  the  south.  White  slavery 
was  everywhere  established  in  a  modified  form.  This  was 
recruited  partly  from  transported  convicts  who  were  sold 
for  periods  of  years,  but  more  largely  from  the  trade  in 
lower  class  Europeans  known  as  "redemptioners,"  or  "in- 
dented servants."  These  masses  of  laborers  were  used  in 
all  kinds  of  work  —  agricultural,  commercial,  and  man- 
ufacturing. Negro  slavery,  as  is  well  known,  finally  be- 
came the  rule  at  the  south.  In  the  central  and  northern 
colonies,  Indian  slavery  continued  through  the  seven- 
teenth century  and  into  the  eighteenth.  But  the  modified 
white  slavery,  above-mentioned,  more  and  more  displaced 
it  as  the  Indian  tribes  were  driven  westward  and  the  tide 
of  immigration  rolled  in  from  Europe.  The  trade  in  white 
redemptioners  became  important  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, swelled  to  great  proportions  in  the  eighteenth,  and 
continued  into  the  early  years  of  the  nineteenth.  By  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  an  American  upper 
class  of  wealthy  landholders  and  capitalists  had  been  fully 
formed.  And  just  as  the  Indian  was  crowded  out  of  the 
lower  class  by  the  redemptioner,  so  the  trade  in  redemp- 
tioners died  away  as  the  American  lower  class  increased  in 
numbers,  and  as  vast  armies  of  so-called  "free  laborers'^ 
came  in  from  England,  Ireland,  Italy,  Hungary,  Germany, 
Scandinavia,  and  elsewhere.  These  native  and  foreign- 
born  free  laborers  competed  with  each  other  for  employ- 
ment at  the  hands  of  the  propertied  upper  class ;  and  it  was 
cheaper  to  employ  such  workers  than  to  buy  redemp- 
tioners (60). 

We  do  not  realize  as  we  should  the  true  nature  of 
American  history.    Never  before  in  all  time  was  there 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  267 

« 

opened  such  a  tremendous  empire  of  good,  unmonopolized 
soil  to  the  settlement  of  such  a  highly  capitalized  race. 
This  fact  is  unique.  Looking  at  American  history  simply 
from  the  American  standpoint,  and  without  reference  to 
its  connection  with  earlier  social  evolution  in  the  Old 
World,  we  can  easily  mark  its  contrast  with  the  histories 
of  such  countries  as  England,  Germany,  France,  Greece, 
Eome,  Egypt,  Chaldea,  and  Israel.  Compare  the  United 
States  with  these  other  nations ;  and  the  point  that  we  are 
trying  to  illustrate  will  come  clearly  out.  As  we  have 
seen  many  times,  the  beginnings  of  these  earlier  peoples 
were  made  in  barbarism  and  savagery.  It  was  barbarian 
conquests  that  laid  the  foundations  of  Israel,  Egypt,  Chal- 
dea, Greece,  Eome,  England,  Germany,  and  France.  It 
was  not  until  three  great  civilizations  had  thus  arisen 
through  long  centuries  of  capitalization  by  cleavage  that 
American  history,  in  the  more  restricted  sense,  began.  The 
discovery,  exploration,  and  settlement  of  America  have 
been  capitalized  from  the  Old  World.  Cleavage  has  been 
a  great  factor  from  the  first.  But  the  presence  of  good, 
free  soil  upon  which  capital  and  labor  could  expand  with 
little  or  no  social  restriction  made  it  impossible  for  the 
American  upper  class  to  acquire  an  Old  World  grip  on  the 
lower  class ;  and,  as  a  rule,  wages  have  not  been  so  low  in 
America  as  in  Europe.  We  are  speaking  now  not  so  much 
of  present  American  society  as  of  earlier  conditions.  If 
America,  instead  of  being  the  vast  continent  that  it  is,  had 
been  a  strip  of  soil  five  hundred  miles  long  and  one  hun- 
dred miles  wide,  its  land  would  have  been  promptly  mo- 
nopolized; and  the  social  conditions  of  the  Old  World 
would  have  been  quickly  reproduced.  Perhaps  we  should 
say,  "more  quickly  reproduced;"  but  this  would  carry  us 
ahead  of  our  present  point.  The  tradition  which  connects 
freedom  with  America  more  than  with  other  countries  is 
clearly  due  to  the  conjunction  of  two  factors:  large  and 
various  capital  in  the  broadest  sense  here  given  the  word, 
and  free  land.     American  freedom  is  not  a  creation  of 


•268  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

Americans.  It  is  cosmic,  whether  we  approach  it  from  the 
physical  or  from  the  sociological  standpoint. 

§  163. —  At  this  point  let  us  once  more  take  up  our 
position  in  England. 

From  about  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century- 
onward  for  a  period  of  over  two  hundred  years,  until  the 
latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  there  were  no  great 
nor  specially  significant  changes  in  the  process  that  we  are 
tracing.  On  the  Continent  the  Eeformation  was  more 
tardy  of  settlement  than  in  England;  and  that  kingdom 
profited  much  by  the  dissensions  of  its  neighbors.  Thou- 
sands and  thousands  of  thrifty  artizans  and  merchants 
were  driven  into  England  and  America.  It  was  in  this 
period  that  the  industrial  supremacy  of  England  in  west- 
ern civilization  became  an  accomplished  fact.  Agriculture, 
however,  still  engaged  the  majority  of  her  people.  None  of 
the  great  labor-saving  machines  had  been  introduced.  Man- 
ufactures were  partly  carried  on  by  capitalist  employers  in 
the  towns ;  and,  as  in  the  woolen  industry,  by  country  folk, 
who  combined  spinning  and  weaving  with  the  cultivation 
of  small  plots  of  land.  There  were,  of  course,  many  small 
shops  with  one  workman,  like  the  shoemaker  or  the  black- 
smith ;  but  we  are  speaking  mainly  of  the  larger  and  char- 
acteristic tendencies ;  and  it  may  be  profitably  noticed,  by 
the  way,  that  these  "individual"  workmen  derived  raw 
material  in  most  cases  from  an  industrial  and  commercial 
system  organized  before  their  time  by  the  forces  that  we 
have  been  studying.  There  were,  of  course,  no  railroads, 
telegraphs,  nor  steamships.  Goods  were  carried  slowly 
on  pack-horses  and  wagons,  and  in  sailing  vessels  along 
rivers  and  over  sea.  English  merchants  were  now  trad- 
ing with  America,  Africa,  Arabia,  India,  Holland,  Ger- 
many, France,  Russia,  Norway,  Italy,  Turkey,  and  other 
countries.  Meanwhile  the  value  of  land  was  rising,  irreg- 
ularly but  steadily;  and  the  landed  upper  class  was  in- 
vesting rents  in  commerce  and  manufactures,  or  making 
loans  to  the  industrial  world.  But  society  was  turning 
less  to  the  purely  landed  class  for  the  accumulation  of  the 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  26^ 

capital  upon  which  all  depended.  Merchants,  out  of  their 
surplus,  were  lending  to  manufacturers;  the  latter  were 
lending  to  the  former ;  and  both  of  these  were  augmenting 
their  capital,  not  only  out  of  the  profits  of  sales  to  the 
landed  class,  but  from  transactions  with  humbler  folk  as 
well.  Naturally,  however,  they  still  found  their  most 
profitable  customers  in  the  upper  class;  while  they  them- 
selves, we  should  remember,  had  invested  a  goodly  part 
of  their  wealth  in  real  estate,  and  were  constantly  receiv- 
ing ground  rents.  It  should  not  be  overlooked  that  the 
wealth  pouring  into  England  through  the  mighty  currents 
of  her  world-wide  commerce  was  appropriated  from  the 
labor  of  the  lower  classes  by  the  economic  masters  of  the 
countries  with  which  England  exchanged  her  products. 

On  the  whole,  this  period  of  about  two  centuries 
marks  a  further  increase  of  capital.  Sir  William  Temple 
(61),  writing  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, remarked  as  a  new  thing  the  many  marriages  con- 
tracted in  the  preceding  fifty  years  between  commercial 
and  landed  families.  Ma<!aulay  (62)  takes  particular  no- 
tice of  the  increasing  capital  seeking  for  investment  in  the 
period  between  the  Eestoration  and  the  Kevolution  (1660- 
1688);  and  the  eagerness  with  which  the  public  took  the 
stock  of  the  great  South  Sea  Company  and  other  schemes, 
legitimate  and  illegitimate,  in  the  first  quarter  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  showed  that  the  same  process  of  ac- 
cumulation was  going  on. 

§  164. —  In  the  latter  half  of  the  eighteenth  century 
there  began  certain  great  changes,  known  collectively  as 
the  "industrial  revolution,"  whose  influence  upon  the  de- 
velopment of  society  has  been  incalculable.  Hitherto,  as 
we  have  seen,  there  had  been  no  machine  industry  in  the 
modern  sense.  But  now  many  labor-saving  inventions 
were  brought  out;  and  several  great  discoveries  were  made 
within  a  short  space  of  time.  Their  effect  was  to  reinforce 
the  power  of  man  over  nature,  so  that  production  could  be 
enlarged  and  perfected  to  an  extent  never  dreamed  of  be- 
fore.   Only  a  brief  and  suggestive  catalog  need  be  given. 


■570  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

The  earliest  inventions  were  in  the  textile  industries.  The 
spinning  wheel  and  the  hand  loom  had  been  used  since 
time  out  of  mind.  But  now  came  the  flying  shuttle  of 
Kay,  the  spinning  jenny  of  Hargreaves,  the  spinning  frame 
of  Arkwright,  the  spinning  mule  of  Crompton,  the  power 
loom  of  Cartwright,  and  the  cotton  gin  of  Whitney;  and 
these  machines  revolutionized  the  manufacture  of  cotton, 
woolen,  and  linen  goods.  Until  far  into  the  eighteenth 
century  wood  had  been  used  for  iron-smelting;  and  the 
scarcity  of  fuel,  together  with  primitive  methods,  had  lim- 
ited the  output  of  metal.  But  now  it  was  discovered  that 
coal  could  be  used  for  smelting ;  an  improved  air  blast  was 
invented;  and  the  modern  coal  and  iron  industries  were 
founded.  The  cardinal  factor  of  power  was  yet  lacking. 
The  great  and  increasing  demand  for  this  was  met  by 
James  Watt,  who  improved  and  practicalized  the  steam 
engine.  Work  which  hitherto  had  been  performed  by  the 
muscles  of  man  and  beast,  and  the  force  of  wind  and 
water,  was  now  accomplished  by  a  power  which  could  be 
applied  almost  everywhere,  increasing  the  efficiency  of 
human  effort  a  million  fold.  The  demand  for  adequate 
means  of  transportation  was  met  by  the  cutting  of  canals, 
and  later  with  railroads  and  steamships.  And  such  was 
the  outward  aspect  of  the  great  industrial  revolution. 

The  new  machines  and  processes  were  thought  out  by 
persons  in  all  ranks  of  society.  No  class  monopolized  the 
initiative.  But  wherever  the  original  brain  might  be,  its 
product,  in  order  to  be  spread  abroad  in  the  world,  re- 
quired the  help  of  capital  which  was  already  in  existence 
or  which  could  be  readily  assembled  out  of  the  fruits  of 
labor.  This  was  furnished  by  the  manufacturing,  com- 
mercial, and  landed  aristocracy.  Two  suggestive  exam- 
ples will  be  given ;  but  the  fact  ought  not  to  require  much 
illustration.  Of  Watt,  the  improver  of  the  steam  engine, 
and  of  the  circumstances  connected  with  the  introduction 
of  this  machine  to  the  world,  we  learn  the  following : 

"It  was  his  good  fortune  to  be  early  supported  by  Dr. 
John  Eoebuck,  a  man  of  singular  enterprize  and  ability, 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  271 

who  carried  on  large  ironworks  on  the  Carron,  in  Stirling- 
shire, and  afterwards,  Avhen  Roebuck  had  been  ruined,  to 
be  taken  into  partnership  by  Matthew  Bolton,  the  head  of 
the  great  ironworks  at  Soho,  near  Birmingham.  Assisted 
by  the  capital  and  labor  at  the  disposal  of  a  great  manu- 
facturer, the  most  splendid  inventive  genius  of  the  eight- 
eenth century  had  full  scope  to  display  itself"  (63). 

"In  1776  Watt's  engine  .  .  .  was  a  success.  Or- 
ders came  in  fast  .  .  .  Saw-mills  in  America,  sugar- 
mills  in  the  West  Indies,  paper-mills,  flour-mills,  engines 
for  flint-grinding  in  the  potteries,  were  ordered  in  quick 
succession.  In  1785  one  was  ordered  for  a  silk-mill  in 
Macclesfield,  and  one  was  built  for  Robinson's  cotton-mill 
at  Papplewick,  in  Nottinghamshire.  The  first  engines  in 
Manchester  and  Glasgow  were  set  to  work  in  1789  and 
1792  respectively.  In  fact,  between  1780  and  1800  the 
steam  engine  was  established  as  the  motive  power  of  the 
day"  (64). 

Concerning  the  introduction  of  canals  we  read  to  sim- 
ilar effect : 

"Francis,  Duke  of  Bridgewater,  .  .  .  was  the  pos- 
sessor of  collieries  at  Worsley  whose  value  depended  on 
their  finding  a  market  at  the  neighboring  town  of  Man- 
chester and  it  was  to  bring  his  coal  to  this  market  that  he 
resolved  to  drive  a  canal  from  the  mine  to  the  river  Irwell. 
With  singular  good  luck  he  found  a  means  of  carrying  out 
his  design  in  a  self-taught  mechanic,  James  Brindley.  But 
in  Brindley's  mind  the  scheme  widened  far  beyond  the 
plans  of  the  duke  .  .  .  ,  and,  instead  of  ending  in  the 
Irwell,  he  carried  the  duke's  canal  by  an  aqueduct  across 
that  river  to  Manchester  itself  (65). 

"Barton  aqueduct  was  built,  and  the  whole  canal  com- 
pleted ...  in  1761,  and  the  price  of  coal  in  Manches- 
ter fell  from  7d.  per  cwt.  to  3Jd.  Not  content  with  this, 
the  duke  set  Brindley  to  work  at  once  on  another  canal 
connected  with  the  first  at  Longford  bridge  and  going  to 
Runcorn.  This  was  also  successfully  carried  through,  at 
a  cost  of  £220,000.    Long  before  it  was  finished  the  duke 


272  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

was  at  his  wit's  end  for  money.  On  one  occasion  he  sent 
his  steward  around  to  collect  scraps  of  rent  in  advance  ta 
pay  his  workmen"  ( 66). 

"What  Brindley  had  discovered  was,  in  fact,  the 
water-road,  a  means  of  carrying  heavy  goods  with  the  least 
resistance,  and  therefore  the  least  cost,  from  the  point  of 
production  to  the  point  of  sale;  and  England  at  once 
seized  on  his  discovery  to  free  itself  from  the  bondage  in 
which  it  had  been  held.  From  the  year  1767,  when  Brind- 
ley completed  his  enterprize,  a  net-work  of  such  water- 
roads  was  flung  over  the  country;  and  before  the  move- 
ment had  spent  its  force.  Great  Britain  alone  was 
traversed  in  every  direction  by  three  thousand  miles  of 
navigable  canals.  To  English  trade  the  canal  opened  up 
thi^  richest  of  all  markets,  the  market  of  England  itself. 
Every  part  of  the  country  was  practically  thrown  open  to 
the  manufacturer;  and  the  impulse  which  was  given  by 
this  facility  of  carriage  was  at  once  felt  in  a  vast  develop- 
ment of  production"  (67). 

The  capitalizing  of  the  industrial  revolution,  however^ 
was  more  than  a  physical  matter.  The  revolution  was  a 
great  mental  movement  on  the  basis  of  a  huge  volume  of 
intangible  capital  which  had  been  slowly  accumulated  by 
the  experience  of  three  historic  civilizations. 

§  165.- —  Looking  around  us  in  present-day  society,  we 
see  a  huge  industrial  plant  which  millions  of  people  util- 
ize in  preparing  the  earth's  resources  in  support  of  life. 
This  plant  is  technically  known  as  "capital."  Looking  at 
it  first  on  the  material  side,  and  attempting  a  brief  but 
suggestive  enumeration,  it  consists  of  such  things  as  fac- 
tory buildings,  with  tools,  machinery,  and  appliances  of 
all  kinds ;  agricultural  implements ;  domestic  utensils ; 
mining  machinery,  railroad  tracks,  cars  and  engines; 
steamships ;  business  blocks ;  dwelling  houses,  etc.,  etc.  If 
it  were  all  gathered  together  and  piled  up  in  one  place, 
what  a  huge  mountain  of  art  it  would  make! 

But  material  forms  of  capital  imply  intangible  forms 
of  it.     And  who  can  rightly  estimate  the  quantity  and 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION. 


273 


variety  of  the  intangible  capital  now  lying  at  the  disposal 
of  men?  Concerning  intellectual  achievements  Mr.  Benja- 
min Kidd  well  says :  "They  are  not  the  colossal  products 
of  individual  minds  amongst  us ;  they  are  all  the  results  of 
small  accumulations  of  knowledge  slowly  and  painfully 
made  and  added  to  by  many  minds  through  an  indefinite 
number  of  generations  in  the  past,  every  addition  to  this 
store  of  knowledge  affording  still  greater  facilities  for 
further  additions''  (68).  Accumulated  knowledge  may  be 
taken  as  representing  intangible  capital. 

The  two  general  forms  of  capital,  indeed,  go  together, 
and  are  accumulated  together ;  and  we  may  work  up  to  the 
illustration  of  our  thesis  from  either  standpoint.  Refer- 
ring broadly  to  both  forms  of  capital,  Mr.  Bellamy  has 
well  said :  "All  that  man  produces  to-day  more  than  4id 
his  cave  dwelling  ancestors,  he  produces  by  virtue  of  the 
accumulated  achievements,  inventions,  and  improvements 
of  the  intervening  generations,  together  with  the  social 
and  industrial  machinery  which  is  their  legacy  .  .  . 
Nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  parts  out  of  the  thousand 
of  every  man's  produce  are  the  result  of  his  social  inheri- 
tance and  environment"  (69). 

Our  prehistoric  ancestors  of  the  stone  age,  and  of  still 
earlier  times,  dragged  out  their  miserable  lives  with  little 
or  no  capital  of  any  kind.  And  what  should  we  of  west- 
ern civilization  do,  if,  at  birth,  we  were  thrust  into  the 
midst  of  the  primitive  struggle  for  existence?  What 
would  distinguish  us  from  our  prehistoric  ancestors? 
Nothing  of  moment.  Prehistoric  men  could  not  invent  the 
telegraph,  discover  the  differential  calculus,  build  a  sky 
scraper,  nor  construct  a  steam  engine;  and  we,  if  removed 
at  birth  from  all  contact  with  civilization,  with  its  ac- 
cumulated capital  of  all  kinds,  could  not  surpass  the 
achievements  of  our  primitive  ancestors.  We  too,  growing 
up  from  birth  wholly  outside  the  influence  of  civilization, 
should  live  the  animal  existence  of  primeval  men. 

18 


274  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

The  vast  and  various  capital  around  us  in  modern 
society,  then,  has  been  produced  by  the  aid  of  earlier  cap- 
ital, which,  in  turn,  rested  back  upon  still  earlier,  and  so 
on.  Broadly  speaking,  capital  has  developed  along  with 
the  evolution  of  society.  Let  us  here  confine  ourselves,  for 
the  sake  of  simplicity,  to  its  material  forms.  Having  been 
reserved  out  of  labor  products,  thrown  over  from  genera- 
tion to  generation,  and  renewed  and  added  to,  capital  ha» 
at  length  —  across  the  flight  of  time  and  the  mutations  of 
mortality  —  accumulated  into  that  vast  industrial  plant 
which  is  employed  today  in  working  up  the  earth's  re- 
sources into  the  form  of  consumable  goods. 

Now,  according  to  the  present  thesis,  the  principal 
agency  whereby  this  industrial  outfit  has  become  a  con- 
crete fact  in  society  is  to  be  found  in  social  cleavage, 
based  at  first  on  personal  slavery  and  serfdom  which,  in 
modern  times,  have  been  commuted  into  competitive  land 
rents. 

This  vast  collective  process,  continually  piling  up  a 
greater  and  greater  mass  of  social  capital,  has  gone  for- 
ward under  the  forms  of  individualism ;  and,  moreover,  the 
psychology  of  society  is  still  individualistic.  Persons  who 
possess  wealth,  whether  in  small  or  in  large  amounts, 
think  and  speak  about  their  own  and  other  people's  wealth 
in  the  individualistic  way.  We  say,  ^^There  is  a  man  who 
began  life  with  little  or  nothing.  But  by  industry  and 
economy  he  has  accumulated  fifty  millions;"  and  we 
thoughtlessly  accept  this  account  as  the  whole  and  exact 
truth.  But  there  is  no  individual  fortune  in  civilization 
which  is  not  practically  social  in  its  origin  and  which 
does  not  derive  significance  more  from  society  than 
from  the  person  identified  with  it.  The  history  of  indi- 
vidual fortunes  can  be  expressed  by  an  almost  unvarying 
general  formula  which  involves  the  proposition  of  cleav- 
age. "The  rich  man,"  says  Frederick  Harrison  (and  he 
could  as  well  have  said  the  small  property  holder),  "is 
simply  the  man  who  has  managed  to  put  himself  at  the  end 
of  a  long  chain,  or  into  the  center  of  an  intricate  convolu- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  275 

tion,  and  whom  society  and  law  suffer  to  retain  the  joint 
product  conditionally"  (70). 


Our  inquiry  could  fitly  be  brought  to  a  period  at  this 
point.  But  the  disturbances  now  agitating  society  are 
such  that  we  can  hardly  close  without  a  word  in  regard  to 
the  bearing  of  social  cleavage  upon  present  conditions. 
We  have  seen  that  the  oriental  and  classic  civilizations, 
after  emerging  upon  the  stage  of  history,  developed  a 
social  problem  which  grew  out  of  the  great  fact  of  cleav- 
age; and,  unless  we  are  mistaken,  western  society  is  re- 
producing the  conditions  of  its  predecessors  in  this  re- 
spect. It  will  hardly  be  disputed  that  cleavage  has  an 
important  bearing  of  some  kind  upon  the  present  social 
problem;  and  our  idea  of  its  relation  to  contemporary 
questions  is  briefly  indicated  in  the  following  chapter. 

(1) — Strabo,  in  Schrader's  Prehistoric  Antiquities  of  the  Aryans 
(London,    1890.    Jevons'    trans.),    p.    281. 

(2) — Gross,  Sources  and  Literature  of  English  History  (London, 
1900),  p.  55.  Cf.  Cunningham,  Growth  of  English  Industry  and  Com- 
merce (Cambridge,  1896),  I,  pp.  26,  27. 

(3) — Holmes,  Caesar's  Conquest  of  Gaul  (London,  1899),  pp.  12, 
13.  Tacitus,  Germania,  chap.  25.  Cf.  StubbS;  Constitutional  History  of 
England   (Oxford,  1875),  sec.  14. 

(4) — Hallam,  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages,  Chap.  7.  Cf.  Motley, 
Rise  of  the  Dutch  Republic,  Introduction,  sec.  5.  Cf.  Blok,  History  of 
the  People  of  the  Netherlands  (N.  Y.,  1898.  Bierstadt  and  Putnam's 
trans.),  I,  p.  170f.  Cf.  Henderson,  Germany  in  the  Middle  Ages  (Lon- 
don, 1894),  pp.  34,  135.  Cf.  Tuttle,  History  of  Prussia  (Boston,  1884), 
pp.  26,  58. 

(5) — Kemble,  The  Saxons  in  England  (London,  1876),  II,  p.  358. 
Cf.  The  Anglo-Saxon  Chronicle   (any  ed.),  item  "Anno  657." 

(6)— Pearson,  History  of  England   (London,  1867),  I,  p.  383. 

(7)— Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution  (N.  Y.,  1886. 
Ashworth's  trans.),  II,  p.  155.  Cf.  Pearson,  History  of  England,  I,  pp. 
814,  635.  Cf.  Putnam,  Books  and  Their  Makers  in  the  Middle  Ages  (N. 
Y.,  1899),  Preface.     Cf.  Macaulay,  History  o;f  England,  chap  3. 

(8) — Vinogradoff,  Villainage  in  England  (Oxford,  1892),  p.  178. 
Cf.  Pollock  and  Maitland,  History  of  English  Law  (Cambridge,  1895), 
I,  p.  38. 


276  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

(9) — On  the  English  lower  class,  Cf.  Seebohm,  The  English  Vil- 
lage Community  (London,  1884),  pp.  89-97.  Pollock  and  Maitland, 
History  of  English  Law,  I,  pp.  11-13,  395-416.  Kemble^  The  Saxons  in 
England,  I,  pp.  185-225.  Maitland,  Domesday  Book  and  Beyond  (Cam- 
bridge, 1897),  pp.  26-66.  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England, 
sec.  132.  Same  in  France  and  Germany:  Mombert^  Charles  the  Great 
(N.  Y.,  1888),  pp.  64,  65. 

(10) — ViNOGRADOFF,  Villainage  in  England,  p.  57. 

(11) — Bede,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  England  (London,  Giles*  ed.), 
ix. 

(12)— Pauli,  Life  of  Alfred   (London,  1878),  p.  227. 

(13) — Janssen,  History  of  the  German  People  (St.  Louis.  Mitchell 
and   Christie's   trans.),    II,   pp.    1-3, 

(14) — Lapsley,  in  English  Historical  Review,  XIV,  p.  515. 

(15) — Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England  (Oxford,  1878), 
III,  p.  610. 

(16) — Rogers,  History  of  English  Agriculture  and  Prices  (Oxford, 
1866),  I,  pp.  160,  161.  Cf.  Turner,  History  of  the  Anglo-Saxons  (Lon- 
don, 1828),  III,  p  83.  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History,  III,  pp.  606,  607. 
Gneist,  History  of  the  English  Constitution,  II,  pp.  105,  106. 

(17) — Hallam,  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages,  chap.  9.  Adams,  Civ- 
ilization During  the  Middle  Ages   (N.  Y.,  1894),  pp.  279,  280. 

(18) — Turner,  History  of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  III,  p.  115, 

(19)— Ashley,  English  Economic  History  (N.  Y.,  1894),  I,  p.  115. 

(20) — Seebohm,  The  English  Village  Community,  pp.  82,  83,  Pear- 
son, History  of  England,  I,  Appendix  C. 

(21)— Knight,  History  of  England   (N,  Y.,  Lovell),  pp.  441,  442. 

(22)— Cf.  Bourne,  English  Merchants  (London,  1866),  pp.  65-68. 
Grube,  Heroes  of  History  and  Legend  (London,  1880),  chap.  13.  Gib- 
bins,  Industry  in  England  (London,  1896),  p.  138,  Stubbs,  Select  Char- 
ters (1884),  p  65,  Idem,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  III,  pp. 
595,  596. 

(23)— Ashley,  English  Economic  History  (N.  Y.,  1894),  I,  p.  97. 

(24) — Henderson,  Germany  in  the  Middle  Age  (London,  1894), 
p.  417. 

(25)— Green,  Town  Life  in  the  Fifteenth  Century  (London,  1894), 
chaps.  7,  8,  9.    Stubbs,  Constitutional  History,  I,  pp.  425,  426, 

(26) — Cf,  Janssen,  History  of  the  German  People,  II,  pp.  1-3. 
Turner,  History  of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  III,  p.  105.  Hallam,'  Europe  in 
the  Middle  Ages,  chap.  9  Traill,  Social  England  (N.  Y.,  1898),  I,  p. 
207.    Ashley,  English  Economic  History   (N.  Y.,  1898),  II,  p.  219. 

(27)— Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant  (Oxford,  1890),  I,  pp,  5-8,  Cf. 
Traill,  Social  England  (N.  Y.,  1897),  II,  pp.  109,  265,  556, 

(28)— Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant,  I,  p.  107. 

(29)— Cf.  Green,  Town  Life  in  the  Fifteenth  Century,  I,  pp.  53,  54. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION.  277 


(30)— Pollock  and  Maitland,  History  of  English  Law,  I,  p.  633. 
ViNOGRADOFF,  Villainage  in  England,  p.  86. 

(81)— Cf.  Traill,  Social  England,  II,  p.  111. 

(32)— Green,  Town  Life,  I,  pp.  53,  54. 

(33)— Rogers,  Six  Centuries  of  Work  and  Wages  (N.  Y.,  Put- 
nanis),  p.  338.  Ashley  English  Economic  History,  II,  p.  100.  Traill, 
Social  England,  II,  556. 

(34)— Rogers,    English   Agric.   and   Prices,   I,   p.   530. 

(35)— Idem,  Work  and  Wages,  p.  338.     Green,  Town  Life,  II,  p.  66f. 

(36)— Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant,  I,  p.  116. 

(37)— ViNOGRADOFF,  Villainage,  pp.  178,  291,  306.  Cf.  Eng.  Hist. 
Review,  XV,  The  Disappearance  of  English   Serfdom. 

(38)— Cf.  Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant,  I,  p.  51.  Rogers,  Work  and 
Wages,  pp.  339,  340.  Idem,  Agric.  and  Prices,  IV,  pp.  106-109.  Cun- 
ningham, English  Industry,  etc.,  I,  pp.  440,  453.  Traill,  Social  Eng- 
land  (N.  Y.,  1898),  III,  p  121.    Ashley,  Eng.  Econ.  Hist.,  II,  169. 

(39) — Cunningham,  English  Industry,  I,  p.  506f.  Ashley,  Eng. 
Econ.  Hist.,  I,  p.  92.  Idem,  The  English  Woolen  Industry  (American 
Economic  Asso.,  1887),  pp.  45-53,  75-84.  Cf.  Eng.  Hist.  Review,  XII,  p. 
437f. 

(40)— Green,  Town  Life,  II,  chap.  4.  Webb,  History  of  Trade 
Unionism    (London,   1894),  p.  37,   note. 

(41)— Ashley,  Eng.  Econ.  Hist.,  I,  p.  103.  Cf.  Eng.  Hist.  Re- 
view, V,  p.  652.  Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant,  I,  p.  125.  Green,  Short 
History  of  the  English  People,  Book  4,  sec.  4.  Idem,  History  of  the 
English  People,  Book  5,  chap.  1.  Guizot,  Civilization  in  Europe,  Lect. 
13.     Traill,   Social  England,   II,  pp.  397,   407. 

(42)— Rogers,  Work  and  Wages,  p.  360.  Cf.  Adams,  Civilization 
and  Decay  (N.  Y.,  1897),  chap.  7. 

(43)— Trevelyan,  England  in  the  Age  of  Wikliffe  (London,  1899), 
p.   170. 

(44)— Wikliffe,  Select  English  Works  (Oxford,  1869-1871.  Ar- 
nold's ed.).   Ill,  pp.  216,   217. 

(45) — Blackstone,  Commentaries  on  the  Laws'  of  England  (N. 
Y.,  1890.  Chase's  ed.),  p.  423.  Cf.  Froude,  History  of  England  (N. 
Y.,  1873),  I,  p.  328f.  Baird,  Rise  of  the  Huguenots  of  France  (N.  Y.), 
I,   p.   61f. 

(46)— Motley,  Rise  of  the  Dutch  Republic  (Phila.,  McKay),  I,  p.  77. 

(47)— Idem,  p.  272. 

(48)— Green,  Hist,  of  the  Eng.  People,  Book  6,  chap.  1. 

(49) — Idem,  Book  6,  chap.  5. 

(50)— Idem,  Book  7,   chap.  2. 

(51)— Bagehot,  The  English  Constitution  (N.  Y.,  1890),  pp.  19, 
20.  Cf.  Seignobos,  The  Political  History  of  Europe  Since  1814  (N.  Y., 
1900.    Macvane's  ed.),  pp.  19,  20. 


278  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


(52) — Macaulay,  Miscellanies,  on  Nugent's  Hampden,  pars.  107, 
108.  Cf.  Hallam,  Constitutional  History  of  England  (N.  Y.,  1880),  I, 
pp.  597,  610. 

(53)— Lecky,  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  (N.  Y.,  1888), 
I,  p.  203. 

(54) — Gardiner,  History  of  England  (London,  1884),  IX,  p.  158. 

(55) — Latimer,  First  Sermon  Before  Edward  VI   (Parker  Soc). 

(56) — Green,  History  of  the  English  People,  Book  5,  chap.  1. 

(57) — Latimer,   First  Sermon,  etc. 

(58) — See  the  conservative  estimate  of  the  cost  of  Columbus'  first 
voyage  in  Fiske,  The  Discovery  of  America  (Boston,  1896),  I,  pp. 
418,   419. 

(59)— Cf.  Fiske,  The  Beginnings  of  New  England  (Boston,  1900), 
p.  80.  Cf.  Bradford,  History  of  Plimouth  Plantation  (Mass.  State  ed., 
Boston). 

(60) — Cf.  on  American  social  cleavage,  the  following:  Eggleston, 
The  Transit  of  Civilization  (N.  Y.,  1901),  p.  294f.  Fisher,  The  Colo- 
nial Era  (N.  Y.,  1897),  pp.  61,  75,  109,  159,  253,  254.  McCrady,  South 
Carolina  Under  the  Proprietary  Government  (N.  Y.,  1897),  p.  477f. 
Idem,  South  Carolina  Under  the  Royal  Government  (N.  Y.,  1901),  pp. 
143f,  399f.  Mereness,  Maryland  as  a  Proprietary  Province  (N.  Y.,  1901), 
chap.  5.  Browne,  Maryland  (Boston,  1884),  pp.  179-183.  Weeden,  Eco- 
nomic and  Social  History  of  New  England  (Boston,  1890),  I,  pp.  84, 
85,  99,  149,  400 ;  II,  449,  520,  763,  .834.  Bruce,  Economic  History  of 
Virginia  in  the  Seventeenth  Century  (N.  Y.,  1896),  I,  p.  572;  II,  pp. 
If,  57f.  McMaster,  History  of  the  People  of  the  United  States'  (N. 
Y.,   1900),   V,   chaps.  43   and  44. 

(61)— Lecky,  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  (N.  Y.,  1888), 
I,  p.  209.     Cf.  Harrison,  Description  of  England,   Book  3,  chap.  4. 

(62) — Macaulay,  History  of  England,  chap.  19.  Cf.  Traill,  Social 
England,  IV,  pp.   115,  116. 

(63)— Lecky,  England  in  the  Eighteenth  Century  (N.  Y.,  1887), 
VI,  p  216. 

(64)— Traill,  Social  England  (N.  Y.,  1899),  V.  pp.  461-463.  Cf. 
Smiles,  Lives  of  the  Engineers,   chap.  8. 

(65) — Green,  History  of  the  English  People,  Book  9,  chap.  3. 

(66)— Traill,  Social  England,  V,  p.  323. 

(67) — Green,  as  above.  Cf.  The  Dictionary  of  National  Biography 
(English),  under  the  names  "Watt,"  "Brindley,"  "Bridgewater,"  "Roe- 
buck," etc.,  etc.,  for  important  material  relative  to  social  cleavage.  One 
who  can  read  between  the  lines  will  find  this  Dictionary  a  mine  of 
suggestion.  The, general  sociological  value  of  biography  does  not  seem 
to  be   fully  appreciated  as  yet. 

(68)— Kidd,    Social   Evolution    (N.   Y.,    1895),  p.   286. 

(69)— Contemporary    Review,    July,    1890. 

(70)— Forum,   Dec,   1893. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  (CONTINUED). 


§  166. —  For  the  last  three  centuries  the  great  human 
tide  has  been  setting  across  the  Atlantic.  Hardly  paus- 
ing on  the  eastern  coasts  of  America,  it  has  flowed  on  into 
the  West,  sweeping  the  Indian  before  it.  When  the  great 
modern  exodus  began,  all  the  best  land  in  Europe  had  been 
appropriated  by  the  upper  class;  and  the  enclosure  of 
the  soil  there  is  now  complete.  In  the  United  States  of 
America  at  the  present  time  it  is  a  simple  fact  that  all  the 
desirable  territory  once  open  to  the  settler  is  locked  in  the 
grasp  of  private  right,  from  the  Atlantic  to  the  Pacific.  It 
is  not  that  the  present  population  of  America  is  too  great 
for  the  country,  nor  that  the  country  is  settled  up  to  its 
full  capacity;  but  it  is  that  the  unused  land  of  America, 
like  the  unused  land  of  Europe,  is  appropriated,  and  held 
at  a  price.  The  vacant  building  lots  in  and  around  cities 
and  towns,  the  empire  of  unused  farming  soil,  the  mining 
lands  whence  metals,  coal  and  oil  are  taken  —  all  these 
natural  opportunities  and  resources  are  held  on  specula- 
tion. The  situation  which  has  become  chronic  in  Europe 
is  being  reproduced  in  America.  The  enclosure  of  the  soil 
in  Europe  and  America  has  been  so  well  set  forth  by 
Henry  George  that  we  quote  from  him.  The  passage  re- 
produced below  was  written  as  far  back  as  1883 ;  and  re- 
marks about  conditions  at  that  time  apply  now  with  even 
more  force. 

"Twelve  months  ago,  when  the  hedges  were  blooming 
I  passed  along  a  lovely  English  road.  .  .  On  one  side 
of  the  road  was  a  wide  expanse  of  rich  land,  in  which  no 
plow-share  had  that  season  been  struck,  because  its  owner 

(279) 


280  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

demanded  a  higher  rent  than  the  farmers  would  give.  On 
the  other,  stretched,  for  many  a  broad  acre,  a  lordly  park, 
its  velvety  verdure  untrodden  save  by  a  few  light-footed 
deer.  And,  as  we  passed  along,  my  companion,  a  native  of 
those  parts,  complained  bitterly  that,  since  this  lord  of 
the  manor  had  enclosed  the  little  village  green  and  set 
out  his  fences  to  take  in  the  grass  of  the  roadside,  the  cot- 
tagers could  not  keep  even  a  goose,  and  the  children  of  the 
village  had  no  place  to  play!  Place  there  was  in  plenty, 
but,  so  far  as  the  children  were  concerned,  it  might  as  well 
be  in  Africa  or  in  the  moon.  And  so  in  our  Far  West, 
I  have  seen  emigrants  toiling  painfully  for  long  distances 
through  vacant  land  without  finding  a  spot  on  which  they 
dared  settle.  .  .  There  is  plenty  of  vacant  land  on 
Manhattan  Island.  But  on  Manhattan  Island  human  be- 
ings are  packed  closer  than  anywhere  else  in  the  world. 
.  .  .  The  social  pressure  which  forces  on  our  shores 
tl^is  swelling  tide  of  immigration  arises  not  from  the  fact 
that  the  land  of  Europe  is  all  in  use,  but  that  it  is  all  ap- 
propriated. .  .  We  still  talk  of  our  vast  public  do- 
main, and  figures  showing  millions  and  millions  of  acres 
of  unappropriated  public  land  yet  swell  grandly  in  the 
reports  of  our  Land  Office.  But  already  [1883]  it  is  so  dif- 
ficult to  find  public  land  fit  for  settlement,  that  the  great 
majority  of  those  wishing  to  settle  find  it  cheaper  to 
buy,  and  rents  in  California  and  the  New  Northwest  run 
from  quarter  to  even  one-half  the  crop.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered that  the  area  which  yet  figures  in  the  returns  of  our 
public  domain  includes  all  the  great  mountain  chains,  all 
the  vast  deserts  and  dry  plains  fit  only  for  grazing,  or  not 
even  for  that;  it  must  be  remembered  that  of  what  is 
really  fertile,  millions  and  millions  are  covered  by  rail- 
road grants  as  yet  unpatented,  or  what  amounts  to  the 
same  thing  to  the  settler,  are  shadowed  by  them ;  that  much 
is  held  by  appropriation  of  the  water,  without  which  it  is 
useless;  and  that  much  more  is  held  under  claims  of  va- 
rious kinds,  which,  whether  legal  or  illegal,  are  sufficient 
to  keep  the  settler  off  unless  he  will  consent  to  pay  a  price, 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  —  {Continued).  28t 

or  to  mortgage  his  labor  for  years.  .  .  To  the  very 
farthest  corners  of  the  Republic  settlers  are  already  going. 
The  pressure  is  already  so  great  that  speculation  and  set- 
tlement are  beginning  to  cross  the  northern  border  into- 
Canada  and  the  southern  border  into  Mexico;  so  great 
that  land  is  being  settled  and  is  becoming  valuable  that  a 
few  years  ago  would  have  been  rejected  —  land  where  win- 
ter lasts  for  six  months  and  the  thermometer  goes  down 
into  the  forties  below  zero;  land  where,  owing  to  insufifi- 
cient  rainfall,  a  crop  is  always  a  risk ;  land  that  cannot  be 
cultivated  at  all  without  irrigation.  .  .  There  is  not  to- 
day remaining  in  the  United  States  any  considerable  body 
of  good  land  unsettled  and  unclaimed,  upon  which  set- 
tlers can  go  with  the  prospect  of  finding  a  homestead  on 
Government  terms.  Already  the  tide  of  settlement  presses 
angrily  upon  the  Indian  reservations,  and  but  for  the 
power  of  the  general  government  would  sweep  over  them. 
.  .  .  We  may  see  what  is  coming  by  the  avidity  with 
which  capitalists,  and  especially  foreign  capitalists,  who 
realize  what  is  the  value  of  land  where  none  is  left  over 
which  population  may  freely  spread,  are  purchasing  land 
in  the  United  States.  This  movement  has  been  going  on 
quietly,  for  some  years,  until  now  there  is  scarcely  a  rich 
English  peer  or  wealthy  English  banker  who  does  noty, 
either  individually  or  as  the  member  of  some  syndicate, 
own  a  great  tract  of  our  new  land,  and  the  purchase  of 
large  bodies  for  foreign  account  is  going  on  every  day.  It 
is  with  these  absentee  landlords  that  our  coming  millions 
must  make  terms''  (1). 

After  reading  this  passage,  written  in  1883,  it  is  in- 
teresting to  notice  a  paragraph  on  the  editorial  page  of 
The  Ohio  State  Journal,  for  May  22,  1899,  which  observes 
that  "the  increased  demand  for  land  has  induced  the  gov- 
ernment officials  to  expedite  surveying  and  placing  on  the 
market  the  remaining  unoccupied  government  lands  in 
the  West." 

In  the  same  connection  an  editorial  in  The  Farmer's 
Voice,  Chicago,  January  26,  1901,  may  be  read  with  profit. 


282  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

"The  growing  scarcity  of  land  and  the  hunger  of  man 
for  a  place  he  may  call  his  own  are  never  more  graphically 
illustrated  than  during  one  of  those  rushes  for  land  like 
the  one  in  1889,  when  the  free  land  of  Oklahoma  territory 
was  thrown  open  to  settlement.  Who  can  forget  the 
mingled  tragedy  and  comedy  of  that  exciting  time  and  not 
pray  that  its  like  may  never  come  again !  Yet  there  is  in 
prospect  just  such  another  scene  of  brutality,  outrage  and 
murder,  for  at  this  moment  thousands  of  men  are  waiting 
on  the  borders  of  other  vast  areas  of  land,  prepared  to 
make  the  run  of  their  lives  to  secure  the  land  soon  to  be 
thrown  open.  This  land  comprises  about  3,800,000  acres, 
and  is  composed  of  reservations  in  Oklahoma  ceded  to  the 
United  States  since  1895  by  the  Wichitas  and  affiliated 
bands  of  Indians,  and  the  Comanches,  Kiowas  and 
Apaches  in  the  southern  and  southwestern  portions  of  the 
territory.  .  .  The  passing  of  the  land  of  the  people  is 
a  sad  moment  in  the  history  of  our  country.  As  we  go  in 
and  out  about  Chicago,  travel  through  Illinois,  or  Mich- 
igan, or  Indiana,  and  see  the  millions  of  acres  of  virgin 
land  —  land  that  never  grew  a  crop,  yet  which  is  held  at 
prohibitive  prices  —  and  consider  at  the  same  moment  the 
millions  who  now  are  landless,  and  the  new-born  children 
who  are  coming  into  times  when  there  is  left  for  them  no 
heritage  in  land  such  as  awaited  their  parents  born  under 
our  flag  —  as  we  contemplate  this  condition  we  are  com- 
pelled to  question  the  future.  Lord  Macaulay  said  that  so 
long  as  we  had  a  vent  in  free  land  the  safety  of  our  nation 
was  secure,  but  he  foresaw  troublous  times  when  the  peo- 
ple could  no  longer  go  out  to  the  land  and  establish  homes 
for  themselves." 

§167. —  The  land  problem  has  been  ably  treated  by 
Henry  George.  Earlier  writers,  among  whom  were 
Thomas  Spence  (1775)  and  Patrick  Dove  (1850),  have 
dealt  with  the  problem  to  the  same  issue  (2);  but  Mr. 
George  will  always  justly  stand  out  as  the  greatest  student 
of  the  subject.  The  principal  differences  between  his  ap- 
prehension of  the  problem  and  our  view  of  it  arise  out  of 


WESTERN  CIVILIZA  TION  —  ( Continued) .  283 

historical  facts  over  which  no  theories  can  ride.  Mr. 
George  discusses  the  land  problem  with  no  systematic  ref- 
erence to  history ;  while,  according  to  the  view  held  by  the 
writer,  the  land  problem  is  correctly  apprehended  only  in 
an  evolutionary  setting.  Mr.  George  developed  his  views 
at  a  time  when  the  newer  conceptions  of  history  and  of 
society  had  not  acquired  the  depth  and  breadth  which  they 
now  have.  Much  excellent  work  on  the  source-materials 
of  history,  which  had  not  been  accomplished  when  Mr. 
George  formed  his  ideas,  have  been  at  our  disposal.  It  is 
quite  possible  to  discuss  the  land  problem  in  its  contem- 
porary bearings,  without  reference  to  the  past ;  and  it  is  in 
this  practical  respect,  we  think,  that  the  services  of  Mr. 
George  will  be  appraised  by  posterity. 

Mr.  George's  presentation  of  the  land  problem  was 
confused  with  an  inadmissible  individualism.  In  harmony 
with  conventional,  orthodox  economics  of  the  old  school, 
he  assumed  that  capital  possesses,  or  ought  to  possess, 
only  an  individualistic  significance.  He  was  tacitly  in  the 
position  of  imagining  individual  producers  peacefully  at 
work  through  all  ages  developing  the  earth's  resources, 
and  reserving  part  of  their  products  in  the  form  of  capital, 
as  an  aid  to  future  production.  If  he  had  been  interrupted 
in  the  midst  of  an  individualistic  argument  by  a  student 
of  social  cleavage,  he  was  in  the  position  of  brushing  aside 
such  an  interruption  with  the  remark,  "If  capital  has  not 
been  freely  accumulated  by  individuals  it  ought  to  have 
been."  Over  against  the  background  of  individualism,  he 
introduces  the  central  villain,  the  landowner,  who  spoils 
the  play;  and  we  see  ground  rents  ascending  into  the 
regions  where  the  landowner  dwells,  a  useless  creature, 
devouring  the  earnings  of  capitalists  and  laborers  in  lux- 
ury and  riotous  living.  We  are  asked  to  take  this  a  priori 
account  of  the  situation  as  a  true  picture  of  the  real  world 
in  which  we  live.  The  treatment  is  wholly  statical.  There 
is  nothing  said  about  the  historical  conditions  reckoned 
with  in  the  present  inquiry.  Mr.  George's  writings  are  not 
calculated  to  give  the  reader  any  appreciation  of  the  vast 


284  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

and  various  capital  existing  in  society.  "The  value  of  a 
building/'  he  says,  "like  the  value  of  goods,  or  of  anything 
properly  styled  wealth,  is  produced  by  individual  exertion, 
and  therefore  properly  belongs  to  the  individual"  (3).  It 
is  true  that  most  of  the  wealth  of  society  belongs  to  the 
individual ;  but  how  much  of  the  wealth  of  society  derives 
its  origin  and  significance  from  the  individuals  who  own 
it?  It  is  hard  to  see  how  any  single  taxer  whose  attention 
has  been  adequately  directed  upon  the  facts  of  history  can 
remain  an  individualist.  Unless  we  are  preoccupied,  how 
can  we  fail  to  see  that  there  is  rolled  up  across  the  cen- 
turies an  ever  increasing  mass  of  capital  which  is  largely 
formed  upon  the  lines  of  cleavage?  How  can  we  fail  to 
see  that  the  further  society  advances  along  the  path  of 
progress  and  of  time,  the  more  it  comes  under  bonds  to  the 
past,  and  the  less  is  its  capital  due  to  the  labor  of  indi- 
viduals living  at  the  moment?  Mr.  George  did  not  notice 
the  social  nature  of  capital ;  nor  did  he  reckon  with  cleav- 
age as  an  element  in  the  capitalization  of  society.  He  did 
not  emphasize  that  the  owners  of  capital  have  mostly 
saved  it,  not  out  of  their  own  labor,  but  out  of  the  labor  of 
the  lower  class.  He  missed  the  fact  that  society  is  a  col- 
lectivism developing  under  the  forms  of  individualism; 
and  he  took  the  current  individualistic  psychology  of  so- 
ciety at  its  face  value  without  going  beneath  the  form  to 
the  substance. 

Mr.  George  also  mingled  with  his  economics  inad- 
missible propositions  about  "absolute  ethics,"  which  must 
be  ignored  in  order  to  reach  the  essence  of  his  work.  He 
was  at  his  strongest  when  he  said  nothing  about  absolute 
ethics,  and  confined  himself  to  the  contemporary  economics 
of  the  land  problem.  He  was  at  his  weakest  when  he 
trenched  upon  those  profound  problems  of  conduct  which 
have  baffled  philosophical  thinkers  far  greater  than  he. 
When  Mr.  George  was  in  the  ethical  frame  of  mind,  he 
imagined  that  the  future  adjustment  of  the  land  prob- 
lem would  be  based  upon  grounds  of  "absolute  ethics." 
Private  appropriation  of  rent  for  the  use  of  the  land. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  285 

which  no  man  has  created,  thought  Mr.  George,  is  abso- 
lutely wrong  under  any  and  all  circumstances.  Slavery 
likewise  ought  never  to  have  existed.  That  great  social 
cleavage  which  is  revealed  by  history  ought  never  to  have 
been  found  among  men.  No  good  comes  from  it.  From 
the  earliest  age  onward,  according  to  Mr.  George,  human 
society  ought  to  have  been  organized  under  a  democratic, 
individualistic  system  wherein  every  man  possessed  his  in- 
alienable "rights."  Mr.  George's  presentation  of  the  land 
problem,  then,  was  mixed  with  much  archaic  ethical  phi- 
losophy. He  worked  in  a  transition  era ;  and  belonged  at 
once  to  the  present  and  the  past.  Any  future  adjustment 
of  the  land  problem  will  be  based,  not  upon  "absolute 
ethics,"  but  upon  the  solid  grounds  of  contemporary  ex- 
pediency where  Mr.  George  was  strongest.* 

The  land  problem  has  been  so  ably  treated  by  Mr. 
George  and  others  that  there  is  no  excuse  for  going  into  it 
here  at  any  length.  Ample  presentations  of  it  are  con- 
tained in  the  works  whereof  a  list  will  be  found  in  the 
bibliography  at  the  rear  of  this  book.  The  brief  treatment 
which  follows  can  do  no  more  than  suggest  the  situation. 

§  168. —  The  existing  social  regime  places  land  in  the 
same  category  as  things  produced  from  the  earth's  re- 
sources by  human  labor;  and  attempts  to  tax  land  on  the 
assumption  that  there  is  no  difference  between  property  in 
the  earth  and  property  in  things  produced  from  the 
earth's  resources.  It  is  a  natural  and  legitimate  result 
of  this  system  that  speculation  in  unused  land  is  encour- 
aged. As  population  multiplies  and  spreads  out,  the  re- 
duction of  the  soil  to  private  ownership  runs  ahead  of  the 
actual  needs  of  settlement ;  and  presently  the  society  finds 
itself  in  the  midst  of  a  complete  land  monopoly. 

Land  being  thus  treated  as  an  object  which  may  be  ex- 
changed for  other  objects,  or  sold  for  a  cash  price,  or 
leased,  or  taxed,  like  any  other  item  of  property,  it  follows 
that  there  is  a  constant  pressure  to  realize  from  land  as 

*  Expediency  will  secure  for  men  those  rights  which  some  philoso- 
phers imagine  to  be  inherent  and  absolute.  ' 


286  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

much  rent  as  possible.  The  selling  price  of  land  is  cal- 
culated,  in  the  long  run,  with  reference  to  the  rent  that 
can  be  got  for  it.  In  the  use  of  capital  in  all  kinds  of  en- 
terprize  there  is,  first,  a  heavy  private  charge  for  land; 
and,  second,  a  heavy  public  charge  by  way  of  taxation.  If 
a  capitalist  undertakes  to  erect  a  dwelling  house  in  a  city, 
and  has  no  suitable  building  lot,  he  must  rent  or  pur- 
chase appropriate  land  whereon  to  build.  Building  lots^ 
like  all  other  land,  vary  in  price.  We  will  suppose  that 
our  capitalist  pays  |1,500  for  a  site.  Some  sites  are  worth 
far  more,  and  some  far  less.  On  a  location  commanding 
$1,500  Avould  be  placed  a  house  costing  from  two  to  three 
times  as  much  —  say  |3,500.  This  would  bring  the  total 
value  of  the  property  up  to  |5,000.  Our  capitalist  must 
now  pay  an  annual  tax  on  this  total  value.  We  will  place 
the  tax  rate  at  2^;  and  suppose  that  the  property  is  as- 
sessed at  tw'o-thirds  of  its  value.  This  means  an  annual 
payment  of  about  |83.  Thus,  in  order  to  erect  a  f3,500 
house,  our  capitalist  is  compelled  to  pay  f  1,500  for  a  site 
and  $83  annual  tax  in  addition.  This  case  illustrates  a 
universal  fact.  The  earth  being  held  as  private  prop- 
erty, and  assessed  for  taxation  on  the  same  basis  as  prop- 
erty produced  from  the  earth's  resources  by  human  labor, 
all  investments  of  capital  must,  in  the  long  run,  be  made 
to  yield  ground  rent  and  taxes. 

§  169. —  At  the  same  time  we  must  note  the  effect  of 
systems  of  taxation  which,  in  harmony  with  our  present 
regime  of  property,  throw  land  into  the  same  category 
with  wealth  produced  from  the  resources  of  the  land. 

The  testimony  of  experience  is,  that  such  systems 
bear  with  greater  proportional  weight  upon  agricultural 
property  of  all  kinds  than  upon  city  property,  and  more 
heavily  upon  the  smaller  holders  of  all  kinds  of  city  prop- 
erty than  upon  the  larger  holders.  Our  study  of  the  his- 
tory of  Israel  showed  us  the  crushing  out  of  the  smaller 
land  monopolists  in  the  agricultural  districts ;  the  concen- 
tration of  the  property  of  Israel  in  the  hands  of  the  city 
magnates ;  and  the  dramatic  protest  of  the  country  against 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  287 

the  city.  The  same  process  of  concentration  has  been  com- 
ing to  pass  in  western  civilization  in  modern  times.  It 
began  earlier,  and  has  proceeded  further,  in  Europe  than 
in  America;  but  its  progress  in  America  is  more  rapid 
with  each  passing  decade.  The  present  system  of  taxation 
causes  increasing  unrest  and  inquiry.  In  1879,  the  State 
of  California,  for  instance,  adopted  a  new  constitution  at 
the  behest  of  the  agricultural  classes,  under  which  it  was 
expected  that  the  rustic  population  would  be  relieved  of 
its  disproportionate  tax  burdens.  But  as  a  matter  of 
course,  the  new  constitution  has  brought  no  relief  to  the 
class  that  voted  for  it.  The  experience  of  California  is 
that  of  all  the  American  and  European  states.  In  Ohio, 
Governor  McKinley  appointed  a  commission  to  investigate 
the  workings  of  taxation  in  that  state.  The  commission 
reported  in  1893,  showing  that  the  agricultural  counties 
paid  more  than  the  wealthy  city  counties  in  proportion  to 
their  property.  The  over-taxation  of  farmers,  and  small 
property  owners  in  general,  in  country  and  city,  is  elabo- 
rately demonstrated  by  the  1894  report  of  the  Illinois 
State  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics.  The  same  fact,  again, 
is  proved  by  an  investigation  summarized  in  a  pamphlet 
issued  in  1897  by  the  United  States  Department  of  Agri- 
culture (Division  of  Statistics,  Circular  No.  5).  Mayor 
Johnson,  of  Cleveland,  Ohio,  also  declares  that  the  smaller 
property  owners  pay  relatively  more  than  the  larger  hold- 
ers. In  the  course  of  a  signed  statement  issued  in  1900 
after  a  careful  investigation,  he  says : 

"Small  shops  and  homes,  including  the  rented  homes 
of  the  poorer  people,  are  assessed  relatively  higher  than 
any  other  real  estate  in  the  city.  A  great  majority  of 
these  small  properties,  valued  at  less  than  two  thousand 
dollars,  are  assessed  at  more  than  60  per  cent  of  their  true 
value,  some  being  actually  assessed  at  more  than  the  own- 
ers offer  to  sell  the  property  for  .  .  .  The  more  valu- 
able properties,  those  assessed  at  more  than  |2,000  each, 
show  great  variations,  and  generally  the  more  valuable 
pieces  are  assessed  at  the  lowest  rates.     .     .     The  rule 


^88  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

is  almost  universal  that  the  valuable  properties  are  as- 
sessed low,  while  the  least  valuable  are  assessed  high." 

It  is  often  claimed  that  this  state  of  things  can  be 
remedied  by  electing  honest  assessors.  But  while  the  evils 
of  a  system  of  state  revenue  which  places  land  in  the  same 
category  as  other  things  may  be  palliated,  they  can  be  re- 
lieved only  by  a  radical  reform  of  the  system  itself. 

§  170. —  Let  us  now  glance  at  the  upper  and  lower 
classes  under  the  present  regime. 

We  have  seen  that  from  prehistoric  times  down  to  the 
present  there  has  existed  a  vast  lower  stratum  which  has 
never  been  a  propertied  class.  At  present,  throughout 
western  civilization  as  a  whole,  the  lower  class  comprises 
the  larger  part  of  the  community.  It  is  personally  free; 
but  in  order  to  live,  and  provide  for  immediate  bodily 
needs,  it  must  apply  to  the  upper  class,  which  owns  most 
of  the  capital  and  land  of  Europe  and  America.  In  other 
words,  the  members  of  the  lower  class  must  compete  with 
each  other  for  work.  A  small  minority  of  skilled  laborers 
command  high  wages ;  but  this  has  no  effect  on  the  general 
situation.  The  essential  fact  lying  behind  the  relations 
between  upper  and  lower  classes  in  contemporary  society 
has  been  so  well  set  forth  by  Professor  Small  that  we 
quote  from  a  paper  by  him. 

"It  will  possibly  be  news  to  many  men,  who  look  from 
the  calm  heights  of  professional  position  upon  the  strug- 
gles of  organized  wage-earners,  that  only  those  children 
who  inherit  a  title  to  land  or  its  use  are  born  into  a  legally 
protected  right  to  earn  a  living.  Other  children  may  in- 
herit money  or  equivalent  personal  property,  and  so  long 
as  it  lasts  the  law  will  protect  them  in  its  use.  Then  they 
must  apply,  with  the  crowd  born  without  inheritance,  to 
those  who  possess  the  land,  for  the  privilege  of  working  in 
further  support  of  life.  .  .  A  social  system  which  in- 
corporates the  assumption  that  a  portion  of  society  may 
righteously  monopolize  the  productive  forces  of  nature,  so 
that  other  men  must  ask  the  permission  of  the  monopo- 
lists to  draw  on  the  resources  of  nature,  practically  de- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZA  TION  —  (  Continued) .  289 

nies  to  the  unprivileged  class  not  merely  a  rightful  share 
of  goods,  but  an  intrinsic  claim  to  any  share  at  all.  In 
other  words,  it  establishes  at  least  two  castes  among  men, 
the  caste  of  the  propertied  and  the  caste  of  the  pauper- 
ized. Failure  to  perceive  the  literal  truth  of  these  propo- 
sitions is  due  to  sheer  weakness  of  the  imagination.  We 
all  understand  that  if  a  farmer  is  forced  from  his  land, 
the  law  allows  him  no  claim  to  any  other  land  except  a 
life  lease  of  a  place  at  the  poor  farm.  We  understand  that 
if  a  weaver  or  a  switchman  loses  his  job  no  law  compels 
another  employer  to  hire  him.  Few  men  outside  the  wage- 
earning  class  have  fairly  taken  in  the  meaning  of  this  fa- 
miliar situation.  If  a  bookkeeper,  or  salesman,  or  teacher,, 
or  doctor,  or  lawyer,  or  minister  be  thrown  out  of  employ- 
ment, with  no  title  to  land,  and  no  property  in  stocks  con- 
trolling natural  agencies,  he  is  literally  a  man  without  a 
country.  Whatever  his  personal  ability  to  extract  the  sup- 
ply of  his  wants  from  nature's  resources,  the  opportunity 
is  closed.  He  has  no  stock  in  nature.  The  resources  of 
the  world  are  divided  up  among  the  members  of  the  prop- 
ertied caste,  and  the  remainder  of  men  depend  upon  the 
members  of  this  caste  for  permission  to  get  a  share  of 
nature  by  labor  in  improving  nature"  (4). 

§  171. —  The  present  social  problem  in  western  civili- 
zation (at  least  on  its  economic  side)  is  now  before  us  in 
rough  outline.  We  see  the  conditions  under  which  the  use 
of  capital  in  all  kinds  of  enterprize  must  yield  ground  rent 
and  taxes;  in  which  an  ill  adjusted  revenue  system  bur- 
dens the  smaller  holders  of  all  kinds  of  property  more, 
heavily  in  proportion  than  the  larger  holders;  and  in 
which  the  members  of  a  vast  unpropertied  lower  class  are 
forced  to  compete  with  each  other  for  employment  at  the 
hands  of  those  who  hold  most  of  the  capital  and  land  of 
the  community. 

Various  interpretations  are  put  upon  this  problem, 
from  diverse  points  of  view.  The  only  ones,  however, 
which  can  be  accorded  the  merit  of  approaching  the  situ- 

19 


290  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ation  from  the  standpoint  of  radical  analysis  are,  we 
think,  two  —  that  of  the  single  taxers,  and  that  of  the  so- 
cialists. The  discerning  reader  will  perceive  that  the  mo- 
mentum of  our  general  thesis  carries  us  in  between  the 
single  tax  and  socialism.  Concerning  the  latter  we  shall 
have  something  to  say  presently.  Meanwhile  we  turn  to 
the  former. 

§  172. —  The  single  taxer  would  shift  the  incidence  of 
taxation  from  wealth  produced  out  of  the  earth's  re- 
sources to  the  value  of  land  itself.  In  order  to  illustrate 
this  proposition,  we  may  picture  the  capital  and  unused 
land  at  the  disposal  of  society  as  in  the  accompanying 
diagram.  If  there  were  imposed  on  all  land,  used  and  un- 
used, a  tax  equal,  or  approximately  equal,  to  its  market 
value,  the  conditions  confronting  the  investment  of  the 
capital  which  society  has  accumulated  would  be  far 
simpler  than  at  present.    It  would  be  manifestly  impossi- 


f 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  291 

ble  to  hold  vacant  land  out  of  use.  It  is  not  that  under 
such  a  regime  all  unused  land,  or  even  a  thousandth  part 
of  it,  would  at  once  come  into  use.  But  it  is  that  the  bars 
now  up  would  be  down,  for  no  person  or  corporation,  how- 
ever wealthy,  could  afford  to  pay  taxes  equal  to  the  rental 
value  of  property  which  was  yielding  no  income.  The  lay- 
ing of  a  tax  on  land  up  to  its  full  value  would  be  equal  to 
opening  all  unused  soil  to  settlement  and  improvement. 
We  say  nothing  about  the  effect  of  such  a  measure  upon 
improved  property,  leaving  that  by  the  way  temporarily. 
Under  the  present  method,  the  capitalist  in  the  illustra- 
tion already  taken  was  compelled  to  pay,  first,  a  heavy  pri- 
vate charge  for  improving  the  vacant  land;  second,  a 
heavy  public  charge  annually  in  support  of  government. 
Under  the  proposed  method,  the  capitalist  could  improve 
the  unused  building  land  at  an  annual  public  charge  equal 
or  almost  equal  to  its  rental  value  and  go  free  of  taxation 
on  the  improvements.  To  one  who  has  not  looked  into  this 
question,  it  seems  as  if  there  is  a  juggle  of  some  sort  here, 
in  which  some  factor  has  been  eliminated  from  the  reckon- 
ing. For  such,  we  advise  a  closer  consideration  of  the 
facts  thus  far  cited  in  connection  with  the  problem. 

§  173. —  The  land  problem  really  centers  about  the 
question  of  capital;  and  the  slogan  of  the  single  taxer 
ought  to  be  not  "Free  land,"  nor  "Equal  Rights,"  nor 
^^Special  Privileges  to  None;"  but  simply  "Encourage- 
ment of  Capital."  According  to  our  general  view,  cleav- 
age into  upper  and  lower  classes  has  been  the  principal 
factor  in  the  accumulation  of  social  capital.  Cleavage  is 
originally  based  upon  personal  ownership  of  the  lower 
class  by  the  upper;  and  later  upon  ownership  of  the  soil 
whereon  all  must  live.  As  population  multiplies,  the  en- 
closure of  unused  land  exceeds  the  normal  demands  of 
settlement.  Presently  we  have  a  condition  wherein  all  the 
land  is  reduced  to  private  ownership.  At  this  point  the 
evils  of  cleavage  as  based  on  landownership  begin  to  over- 
balance its  benefits;  and  we  have  the  social  problem  of, 
say,  oriental  or  classic  civilization,  or  present  western  so- 


292  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

ciety  in  Europe  and  America.  Non-taxation  of  land  up  to 
its  full  value,  in  contrast  with  heavy  taxation  of  it,  oper- 
ates to  discourage  the  freest  investment  of  capital  in  all 
kinds  of  enterprize  —  agricultural,  mining,  manufactur- 
ing, commercial,  domestic.  Private  property  in  land,  as 
identified  with  private  appropriation  of  rent  for  the  use  of 
the  earth,  is  defensible  only  as  a  temporary  basis  of  that 
cleavage  whereby  social  capital  is  accumulated.  When 
sufficient  social  capital  has  been  amassed,  the  continued 
reduction  of  unused  soil  to  private  and  speculative  owner- 
ship interposes  obstructions  to  the  freest  use  of  capital, 
and  makes  the  economic  operations  of  society  unneces- 
sarily complex  and  cumbersome.  The  paradox  of  cleavage 
in  this  regard  is  no  extraordinary  phenomenon  to  one 
whose  eyes  are  open  to  the  antinomies  of  the  world.  "The 
whole  history  of  civilization,"  says  Bagehot,  "is  strewn 
with  creeds  and  institutions  which  were  invaluable  at 
first,  and  deadly  afterwards"  (5). 

We  do  not  claim  that  the  single  tax  proposition  is  by 
any  means  the  full  or  final  word  on  social  reform.  We  are 
talking  simply  about  the  central  problem  of  the  present 
age,  which  we  believe  to  be  that  of  bringing  Land,  Labor, 
and  Capital  together  in  the  freest  way. 

§  174. —  The  proposition  that  a  heavy  impost  on  land 
values  would  stimulate  the  investment  of  capital  is  al- 
most axiomatic.  Under  the  present  regime,  people  who 
own,  and  people  who  borrow,  capital  are  constantly  in- 
vesting it  in  all  kinds  of  enterprize  under  the  necessity  of 
paying,  first,  either  annual  or  capitalized  ground  rent; 
second,  annual  taxation.  Why  would  not  the  investment 
of  capital  by  owners  and  borrowers  be  stimulated  when 
taxation  is  concentrated  upon  land  according  to  its  value? 
This  is  not  theory,  but  fact,  as  we  shall  presently  see. 
Such  a  measure  would  make  it  impossible  for  the  specula- 
tor to  hold  vacant  land  at  a  price,  and  would  simulta- 
neously make  it  possible  for  the  owner  or  borrower  of  cap- 
ital to  invest  it  in  all  kinds  of  enterprize  on  far  easier 
terms.    In  the  case  already  cited  as  exemplifying  the  pres- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  —  {Continued). 


ent  system,  our  capitalist,  in  order  to  erect  a  |3,500  house, 
was  compelled  to  pay,  first,  |1,500  for  land  whereon  to 
build  and,  second,  $83  annual  tax.  Under  the  single  tax, 
he  would  have  occupied  the  land,  expended  |3,500  for  his 
house,  and  paid  an  annual  rent,  or  tax,  of  about  |75  on 
the  site  value  of  the  location.  The  single  taxer  wishes  to 
universalize  these  conditions  and  open  the  vast  empire  of 
unused  farming  and  mining  lands,  and  building  lots, 
around  which  there  is  now  a  high  speculative  wall  acting 
as  a  bar  to  the  freest  outflow  of  capital  and  labor  in  the 
development  of  the  earth's  resources. 

Not  only  is  the  proposition  almost  axiomatic  that  the 
land  value  tax  thus  proposed  would  stimulate  enterprize; 
but  actual  experience  goes  far  to  prove  it. 

In  July,  1892,  the  town  of  Hyattsville,  Maryland,  U. 
S.  A.,  introduced  the  taxation  of  land  values  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  all  other  local  taxes.  Before  the  new  system  came 
in,  speculators  in  vacant  land  predicted  that  the  heavier 
taxation  of  land  values  would  simply  raise  the  price  of 
land.  They  said  they  would  add  the  tax  to  the  selling 
price  of  their  lots,  and  shift  the  increase  to  purchasers. 
But  when  the  new  system  went  into  effect,  they  saw  that 
they  could  not  afford  to  pay  the  heavier  taxation  on  prop- 
erty that  was  yielding  no  income.  The  expenses  of  the 
town  government  were  not  large  enough  to  call  for  the 
complete  single  tax;  but  as  it  was,  the  tax  rested  upon 
land  values  with  sufficient  pressure  to  force  land  upon  the 
market  at  lower  rates.  After  the  new  system  was  intro- 
duced there  was  determined  opposition  by  land  specula- 
tors ;  and  an  application  was  made  to  the  courts  for  a  writ 
of  mandamus  to  compel  the  town  to  return  to  the  old 
system  of  taxation.  The  State  Court  of  Appeals  declared 
the  new  tax  unconstitutional;  and  it  was  accordingly 
abandoned.  Respecting  the  operation  of  the  system  while 
it  was  in  force,  the  chairman  of  the  Board  of  Town  Com- 
missioners is  reported  as  saying : 

"The  practical  working  of  the  new  system  in  Hyatts- 
ville was  beneficial.    It  has  already  appeared  that  it  light- 


294  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

ens  the  taxes  of  those  most  worthy  of  consideration.  It 
did  more.  Coincident  with  the  adverse  decision  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals,  all  building  came  to  a  standstill,  and 
because  of  the  return  to  old  methods,  the  proposed  con- 
struction of  buildings  was  abandoned.  The  sum  total  of 
the  value  of  all  new  buildings  erected  within  the  two  and 
one-half  years  since  the  forced  abandonment  of  the  new 
system,  does  not  exceed  one-half  of  that  of  the  year  in 
which  it  was  enforced.  There  was  no  practical  difficulty 
in  the  application  of  the  system"  (6). 

Perhaps  even  more  startling  than  this  instance  is  one 
published  in  the  Consular  Reports  of  the  United  States 
Government,  in  Volume  62,  at  page  407.  Under  the  head- 
ing "Land  Tax  in  Kyao-chau,"  we  read:  "The  German 
Government  has  adopted  the  system  of  single  tax  for 
Kyao-chau,  levying  a  tax  of  6  per  cent  on  land  values."  It 
should  be  explained  that  the  place  with  the  queer  name 
is  a  German  colony  in  China.  In  this  instance,  as  in  the 
Hyattsville  case,  the  conditions  are  not  wholly  those  of 
the  ideal  single  tax  but  the  German-Chinese  case  ap- 
proaches the  proposed  method  closely.  This  looks  like  a 
revolutionary  policy  for  a  supposedly  conservative  Euro- 
pean government  to  take ;  but  it  is  a  sign  of  the  times.  Re- 
specting the  steps  leading  up  to  it,  Mr.  W.  McCrackan 
writes  as  follows,  in  the  National  Single  Taxer : 

"A  certain  Major  Wissmann  is  well  known  in  Ger- 
many as  an  African  explorer.  Some  years  ago  he  was 
made  governor  of  one  of  the  German  colonies  in  Africa. 
.  .  Like  all  the  other  German  colonies,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  Kiautschou,  Governor  Wissmann's  colony  was 
languishing  from  militarism  and  land  monopoly  com- 
bined. The  Berlin  land  reformers  took  this  opportunity 
to  send  him  a  memorial  in  which  the  crushing  effect  of  the 
great  companies  which  owned  vast  tracts  of  land  and  held 
them  for  speculative  purposes  was  explained.  Governor 
Wissmann  did  not  reply,  but  it  is  significant  that,  not  long 
after,  he  resigned  his  office,  and  gave  among  his  reasons 
^that  he  was  tired  of  working  for  great  land  syndicates.' 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  295 

From  this  point  on  I  can  only  guess,  but  it  is  reasonable 
to  suppose  that  Major  Wissmann,  well  known  as  an  ex- 
plorer and  standing  high  in  the  councils  of  the  colonial 
party,  should  have  been  consulted  when  a  new  colony  was 
founded  in  China.  .  .  If  Major  Wissmann  was  con- 
sulted about  Kiautschou,  he  who  Vas  tired  of  working 
for  great  land  syndicates,'  the  German  government  prob- 
ably heard  some  home  truths.  At  all  events  the  method  of 
procedure  was  entirely  changed  in  the  new  colony"  (7). 

Concerning  the  new  system  as  finally  established,  the 
German  minister  of  marine  is  reported  as  saying : 

"No  colony  has  ever  enjoyed  such  absolute  freedom 
of  production  and  trade  as  we  have  secured  to  Kiautschou. 
Not  one  single  duty  or  tax  will  be  imposed,  except  the  tax 
on  land  values.  Not  financial  considerations  as  much  as 
considerations  of  politico-economical  character  have  dic- 
tated these  measures.  That  the  measure  is  popular  is 
proved  by  a  petition  presented  to  the  British  government 
by  the  merchants,  who  are  also  the  landowners,  of  Hong- 
Kong,  who,  led  by  Mr.  A.  Mathieson,  proposed  the  aboli- 
tion of  all  taxes  and  the  substitution  for  the  same  of  taxes 
on  land  values''  (8). 

Under  the  local  option  law  in  New  Zealand,  58  munic- 
ipalities have  adopted  the  "Hyattsville  method"  of  land 
value  taxation  to  the  exclusion  of  other  taxes  for  the  pur- 
pose of  raising  local,  municipal  revenues.  The  general 
revenue  system  of  the  whole  country,  in  which  system  the 
municipalities  are  involved,  remains  unchanged,  so  that 
here,  also,  we  do  not  see  the  unrestricted  single  tax.  But 
even  on  the  present  basis,  after  five  years'  experience,  the 
premier  of  New  Zealand,  Mr.  R.  J.  Seddon,  states  that  the 
new  tax  has  proved  a  success,  popular  opinion  support- 
ing it  so  strongly  that  its  repeal  is  out  of  the  question  (9).* 

*  The  city  authorities  of  Glasgow,  Scotland,  backed  by  popular 
vote,  have  asked  the  British  Parliament  for  permission  to  adopt  this 
system  for  local  purposes;  and  many  other  British  cities  have  done  the 
same.  At  the  fall  election  of  1902,  a  vote  was  taken  in  Colorado  on  a 
law  permitting  local  option  on  the  question  whether  local  revenue   sys- 


296  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 


In  April,  1892,  the  United  States  House  of  Represent- 
atives appointed  a  committee  to  investigate  the  subject  of 
taxation  in  the  District  of  Columbia.  While  we  are  on 
this  part  of  our  subject,  it  is  worth  while  to  consider  the 
report  of  the  committee.  Strong  recommendations  in  fa- 
vor of  heavy  land  value  taxation  were  made.  It  should 
be  observed  that  one-half  the  governmental  expense  of  the 
District  of  Columbia  is  borne  by  the  national  treasury. 
In  1892  the  proposed  revenue  was  about  |6,000,000.  The 
committee  reported  that  a  tax  absorbing  one-eighth  of  the 
ground  rent  of  the  District  would  supply  the  District's 
half  of  the  |6,000,000;  that  a  tax  on  land  values  at  the 
rate  of  one-fourth  of  the  total  ground  rent  would  supply 
the  entire  |6,000,000  without  calling  upon  the  nation  at 
large  for  a  single  penny.  And  the  committee  went  on  to 
say: 

"The  collection  of  50  per  cent  would  give,  without  any 
tax  upon  improvements  or  any  contribution  whatever 
from  the  national  government,  |12,000,000  of  revenue  a 
year,  or  more  than  twice  the  amount  the  Commissioners 
ask  for  —  a  sum  which  properly  used  would  soon  make 
the  National  Capital  the  most  beautiful  and  delightful 
city  in  the  world.  And  this  could  be  done  without  the 
slightest  tendency  to  decrease  the  comfort  or  increase  the 
cost  of  living  of  any  resident  or  visitor.  On  the  contrary, 
the  very  weight  of  the  tax  thus  levied  on  land  values  would 
check  speculation  and  make  land  needed  for  buildings 
much  easier  to  be  had  by  those  who  wanted  to  improve  it, 
an  effect  which  in  its  turn  would  so  increase  population 
and  prosperity  as  to  greatly  increase  legitimate  land  val- 
ues and  thus  increase  the  fund  that  could  in  this  manner 
be  drawn  on  for  all  District  needs.      .     . 

terns  should  be  modified  in  the  direction  of  the  single  tax.  Newspaper 
reports  had  it  that  the  vote  was  heavily  in  the  negative;  but  astounding 
revelations  of  fraud  in  the  count  have  been  made,  even  an  opposition  paper 
like  the  Denver  Times  printing  damaging  concessions.  Interesting  develop- 
ments may   be  anticipated  in  this  case. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  297 

When  it  is  remembered  that  the  value  of  improve- 
ments is  constantly  depreciating,  and  that  of  the  total  tax- 
able value  of  the  District,  they  constitute  less  than  one- 
fifth,  amounting  in  round  numbers  to  but  |T3,000,000  out 
of  1495,000,000,  while  the  value  of  land,  amounting  al- 
ready to  124,000,000  of  annual  rent,  is  appreciating  at  the 
rate  of  over  |40,000,000  a  year,  it  would  seem  but  simple 
justice  to  do  away  with  the  burden  now  levied  on  the  de- 
preciating property,  even  though  it  necessitated  a  slight 
increase  in  the  taxation  of  that  property  so  constantly  and 
so  enormously  appreciating. 

If  the  National  Government  were  to  assume  the  entire 
cost  of  the  District  Government,  no  one  would  be  bene- 
fited except  the  landowners.  They  could  and  would  still 
demand  from  tenants  the  full  rental  of  land  regardless  of 
the  remission  in  the  assessment  on  it,  and  the  effect  of  this 
net  increase  in  the  profits  of  land-owning  would  be  to 
raise  the  selling  value  of  land  and  to  greatly  stimulate 
land  speculation.  Thus  the  effect  of  such  liberality  to- 
ward the  Federal  District  on  the  part  of  the  Congress 
would  ultimately  be  only  to  increase  enormously  a  few 
large  fortunes  and  to  drive  a  greater  number  of  citizens 
into  narrower  quarters  and  make  it  more  difficult  for 
them  to  live.  And  if,  while  refraining  from  assessing  land 
values,  still  more  lavish  appropriations  were  made  from 
the  proceeds  of  general  taxation  for  the  purpose  of  im- 
proving and  embellishing  the  National  Capital,  the  effect 
would  simply  be  to  increase  a  few  great  fortunes  and  to 
hasten  the  crowding  of  the  body  of  its  population  into 
flats  and  tenement  houses,  and,  behind  stately  avenues 
lined  with  palaces,  to  raise  noisome  slums. 

Already  the  effect  of  the  growth  and  improvement  of 
the  Federal  District  has  been,  by  the  increase  of  land  val- 
ues, not  only  to  give  hundreds  of  millions  to  a  fortunate 
few,  but  to  increase  the  cost  of  living  to  such  a  degree  as 
to  make  it  a  serious  question  with  many  of  the  officers  and 
employees  of  the  National  Government  w^ho  are  called  on 
to  live  here.    And  if  this  tendency  continues  not  only  will 


298  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  salaries  paid  to  employees  of  the  United  States  soon 
become  entirely  inadequate  to  the  scale  of  living  for  which 
they  were  intended,  but  the  Capital  of  the  American  Re- 
public must  ere  long  present  such  a  contrast  between  lux- 
urious idleness  and  poverty-stricken  workers  as  can  be 
exceeded  in  no  capital  of  professedly  aristocratic  coun- 
tries.    .     . 

That  the  change  we  recommend  in  the  subject  of  as- 
sessment would  powerfully  contribute  with  the  changes 
we  recommend  in  the  manner  of  assessment  to  secure 
equality,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  When,  instead  of  being 
distracted  by  various  subjects  of  taxation,  public  atten- 
tion is  concentrated  upon  one,  and  that  a  subject  which 
from  its  nature  cannot  be  hidden  or  concealed  but  can  be 
perceived  by  everyone  who  walks  or  rides  along  the  pub- 
lic streets,  public  opinion  will  be  called  in  to  secure  equal- 
ity'' (10). 

During  the  investigation  by  the  committee  from 
whose  report  we  have  made  these  extracts,  the  assessors 
raised  the  reported  value  of  land  for  taxation  in  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia  from  |76,000,000  to  $198,000,000  —  an 
increase  of  160  per  cent.  This  extraordinary  measure 
was  probably  dictated  by  fear  of  something  more  drastic. 
Although  it  did  not  return  even  one-half  the  true  value  of 
the  land,  and  although  the  method  of  assessment  was  not 
reformed,  it  naturally  gave  some  relief;  but  large  bodies 
move  slowly ;  and,  at  the  present  writing,  the  single  tax  on 
land  values  has  not  yet  been  adopted  in  the  Capital  City 
of  the  United  States. 

The  eighth  biennial  report  of  the  Illinois  State  Bu- 
reau of  Labor  Statistics,  1894,  presented  an  exhaustive 
study  of  the  revenue  question.  It  recommended  the  sin- 
gle tax  on  land  values  as  the  only  way  out  of  many  pres- 
ent social  difficulties;  and  its  general  treatment  was  as 
positive  and  intelligent  as  that  of  the  Washington  report. 

These  reports  are  interesting  and  suggestive  in  con- 
nection with  the  references  to  the  experience  of  Hyatts- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  —  {Continued).  299 

ville,  the  German-Chinese  colony,  and  the  New  Zealand 
municipalities. 

None  of  the  actual  cases  mentioned  exhibits  the  sin- 
gle tax  in  operation  in  its  untrammeled  form  over  a  wide 
social  area;  but  they  all  tend  to  show,  from  the  stand- 
point of  experience,  what  the  single  taxer  claims  from  the 
standpoint  of  pure  logic  —  that  the  proposed  method,  if 
once  generally  applied  throughout  a  large  part  of  civil- 
ized society,  would  stimulate  the  investment  of  capital. 

§  175. —  The  single  taxer,  then,  is  in  the  position  of 
declaring  that  the  present  actual  investment  of  capital  in 
ways  most  useful  to  the  greatest  number  of  people  repre- 
sents an  under-investment  as  contrasted  with  what  would 
normally  take  place  if  social  conditions  were  more  per- 
fectly adjusted.  Let  this  under-investment  be  represented 
by  the  letter  x.  Then  the  normal  use  of  capital  which  the 
single  tax  proposition  contemplates  will  be  represented  by 
X  plus  a  relatively  small  quantity.  The  single  taxer,  in 
last  analysis,  claims  that  the  present  social  problem  grows 
out  of  the  fact  that  the  present  use  of  capital  x  instead 
of  X  +.  He  asserts  that  this  minus  use  is  the  sign  of  a 
maladjustment  which  throws  the  social  machine  out  of 
gear  (or,  perhaps  better,  which  prevents  the  machine  from 
being  better  geared),  and  enables  the  upper  class  to  ex- 
ploit the  lower  class  in  the  service  of  luxury. 

This  claim  is  so  simple  that  it  seems  futile.  But  the 
trouble  is  that  we  do  not  take  a  sufficiently  dynamic  view 
of  life.  We  look  at  society  too  much  from  the  statical 
standpoint;  and  we  naturally  and  mistakenly  seek  dra- 
matic social  causes  and  solutions  for  dramatic  social 
problems. 

Since  capital  is  a  product  of  labor,  an  artificial  check 
upon  the  use  of  capital  translates  itself  into  the  unem- 
ployment of  an  equivalent  portion  of  the  labor  power  of 
society.  The  labor  actually  employed  at  any  given  time  in 
ways  conducive  to  the  greatest  good  of  the  greatest  num- 
ber may  be  represented  by  the  letter  x.  The  labor  which, 
if  social  adjustments  were  better,  could  be  employed  in  the 


^00  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

most  useful  way  would,  then,  be  represented  by  x  plus 
a  certain  relatively  small  quantity.  This  unemployed,  or 
poorly  employed,  labor  —  small  relatively,  but  large  abso- 
lutely, and  scattered  everywhere  in  society  —  reacts  upon 
the  entire  labor  situation.  It  is  the  so-called  "surplus  on 
the  labor  market.''  The  presence  of  this  labor  surplus  has 
a  tendency  to  depress  the  wages  of  all  labor  employed.  An 
artificial  surplus  of  labor  is  the  correlate  of  an  artificial 
scarcity  of  work.  We  talk  about  "the  market  for  labor  f 
and  we  tend  to  forget  that  there  is  a  market  for  "jobs"  as 
well.  An  artificial  scarcity  of  jobs,  like  scarcity  of  any- 
thing else,  raises  the  price  of  jobs.  Laborers  must  pay 
more  and  more  to  obtain  jobs,  or,  what  is  the  same  thing, 
accept  smaller  wages  for  the  same  work. 

In  this  way,  the  labor  surplus  may  be  entirely  ab- 
sorbed into  the  industrial  field.  Labor  may  be  universally 
employed;  —  but  employed  on  what  terms?  At  wages 
representing  less  than  the  expedient  share  of  labor  in  the 
industrial  output.  The  increase  of  population  swells  the 
ranks  of  labor,  makes  the  price  of  labor  lower,  and  the 
price  of  employment  higher;  and  alongside  of  splendid 
and  growing  opulence  we  see  a  vast  mass  of  under-paid 
working  people  enthralled  in  wage  slavery. 

§  176. —  Common  knowledge  and  statistics  testify 
that  the  wealth  of  western  civilization  is  increasing  stead- 
ily. Yet  statistics  also  make  it  certain  that  wealth  and 
landed  property  are  concentrating  in  relatively  fewer 
hands,  and  that  the  power  of  the  upper  class  over  the 
lower  is  increasing. 

Respecting  Germany,  Dr.  Charles  Spahr,  in  his  work 
on  the  distribution  of    wealth,  says : 

"In  Germany  the  degree  of  concentration  is  less  than 
in  Great  Britain  or  Paris,  though  each  decade  and  each 
reform  in  the  method  of  assessing  the  income  tax  reveals 
greater  concentration.  A  dispassionate  statement  of  the 
change  that  has  been  going  on  was  made  by  the  late 
Professor  Eoscher  (Political  Economy,  Book  3,  chap.  7, 
sec.  205).    Between  1852  and  1873  the  number  of  incomes 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  {Continued).  301 

in  Prussia  assessed  between  |300  and  |750  increased  175.5 
per  cent ;  tlie  number  assessed  between  |9,000  and  |18,000 
increased  470.6  per  cent;  while  the  number  assessed  at 
more  than  |40,000  increased  2,200  per  cent.  This  dispro- 
portionate increase  of  large  incomes  continues  to  the  pres- 
ent day.  Soetbeer's  table  of  Prussian  incomes  for  1890  is 
shown  to  be  obsolete,  or  worse,  by  the  assessments  for 
1892-93.  His  estimates  for  the  large  incomes  must  be 
doubled  to  conform  with  the  newer  tax  lists.  From  these 
it  appears  that  a  little  over  1  per  cent  of  those  receiving 
incomes  hold  more  than  20  per  cent  of  the  income  of  the 
kingdom,  while  10  per  cent  hold  nearly  one-half  of  it"  (13). 

On  the  basis  of  the  fortieth  report  of  the  British  in- 
land revenue  department,  and  the  British  statistical  ab- 
stract for  1897,  the  following  interesting  and  significant 
figures  are  shown :  In  round  numbers,  one-half  of  one  per 
cent  of  the  population  owns  over  seventy  per  cent  of  the 
real  and  personal  property  of  the  United  Kingdom.  On 
the  other  hand,  92  per  cent  of  the  population  owns  less 
than  one-third  of  one  per  cent  of  the  real  and  personal 
property  (11).  Investigations  in  the  city  of  London  by 
Mr.  Charles  Booth,  ex-president  of  the  Royal  Statistical 
Society,  show  that  31  per  cent  of  the  population  are  in 
some  degree  dependent  upon  charity;  that  51  per  cent 
support  themselves  upon  the  verge  of  poverty;  while  only 
the  remaining  18  per  cent  are  in  various  degrees  of  easy 
circumstances  (12). 

Concerning  American  holdings,  we  take  the  following 
from  the  elaborate  report  of  the  Illinois  State  Bureau  of 
Labor  Statistics  for  1894 : 

"A  concentration  of  private  land  owning,  the  magni- 
tude and  the  danger  of  which  were  never  before  ap- 
proached in  the  world's  history  is  to-day  going  on  under 
our  eyes.  Our  methods  of  taxation  stimulate  and  nour- 
ish it. 

It  is  the  value  of  holdings,  not  merely  their  area,  that 
in  periods  of  highly  specialized  industry  like  ours,  indi- 
cates the  extent  of  land  monopoly.    The  usefulness  of  land 


302  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

is  measured  by  its  value.  Thousands  of  acres  in  sparsely 
settled  regions  are  of  little  use,  and  consequently  of  little 
value,  in  comparison  with  fractions  of  an  acre  at  labor 
centres;  if  the  whole  Desert  of  Sahara  were  monopolized 
it  would  make  but  little  difference  either  to  the  laborer  or 
to  the  monopolist,  but  the  monopolization  of  a  city  busi- 
ness block  controls  enormous  unearned  incomes.  .  Be- 
tween Sahara  and  the  best  business  block  of  the  most 
flourishing  city  there  are  many  grades  of  utility,  which 
are  expressed  in  corresponding  grades  of  value.  A  lot  in 
the  desert  might  beg  in  vain  for  a  tenant  who  would  pay 
rent;  a  lot  in  the  business  block  yields  a  fortune  in  an- 
nual rent  to  its  owner.  Farms  in  populous  places  are 
worth  more  than  the  sandy  billows  of  a  desert,  and  those 
on  the  edge  of  towns  still  more,  while  lots  in  suburbs  or 
smaller  towns  are  lower  in  value  than  those  in  business 
centers;  and  so  the  values  range;  the  difference  in  every 
case  being  at  bottom  a  difference  of  utility,  a  difference, 
that  is  to  say,  in  the  expenditure  of  labor  necessary  to  se- 
cure under  given  circumstances  a  given  industrial  result. 
Since  this  difference  is  measured  by  value,  the  intensity  of 
the  centralization  of  land  ownership  must  also  be  meas- 
ured by  value. 

When  this  is  done  the  enormous  and  growing  extent 
and  the  threatening  character  of  land  monopoly  in  this 
•country  may  be  quickly  perceived  and  conclusively 
proved.  More  than  75  per  cent  in  value  of  American  land 
is  said  upon  good  authority  to  be  owned  by  less  than  10 
per  cent  of  the  whole  number  of  land  owners.  Or,  to  put 
it  in  reverse  form,  90  per  cent  of  American  land  owners 
own  less  than  one  quarter  of  American  land.  And  outside 
the  top-heavy  land-owning  class,  a  large  and  increasing 
mass  of  the  population  own  no  land  at  all''  (14). 

The  report  then  goes  on  to  demonstrate  that  the  obser- 
vations applied  to  the  United  States  in  general  are  sub- 
santially  true  of  Illinois.  We  cannot  pause  here  for  de- 
tails, and  must  refer  the  reader  to  the  bibliography  for 
this  chapter. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  {Continued).  303 

From  another  standpoint,  a  writer  in  the  Outlook 
states  the  case  for  America  thus : 

"Half  a  century  ago,  when  the  first  estimate  of  na- 
tional wealth  was  made  by  the  Census  Bureau,  the  aggre- 
gate value  of  private  property,  excluding  slaves,  was  lit- 
tle more  than  five  billion  dollars.  Our  population  is  now 
but  little  more  than  three  times  as  great  as  then,  but  our 
wealth  is  more  than  fifteen  times  as  great.  Yet,  except  at 
the  South,  the  proportion  of  propertyless  families  is  per- 
haps greater  now  than  then,  and  the  poverty  of  the  poor  is 
made  the  more  distressing  by  reason  of  the  contrasts  in 
economic  conditions  that  have  developed.  The  increase  in 
our  aggregate  wealth  is  likely  to  go  on,  and  the  Nation's 
welfare  depends  upon  whether  the  increase  goes  chiefly  to 
augment  the  power  and  luxury  of  those  already  rich,  or 
the  independence,  comfort,  and  culture  of  the  rank  and 
file  of  the  people.  In  other  words,  the  problem  before  us 
is  to  make  the  increase  in  National  wealth  synonymous 
with  the  increase  of  National  well-being"  (15). 

Nobody  would  be  foolhardy  enough  to  attempt  to 
show  that  the  ownership  of  real  and  personal  property  is 
now  generally  diffusing  in  the  United  States.  The  most 
that  is  attempted  is  demonstration  that  wages  are  in- 
creasing. But  there  is  grave  dispute  even  of  this.  Con- 
cerning the  summary  of  the  famous  Senate  Report  of  1893, 
Dr.  Spahr  writes : 

"The  statisticians  employed  to  summarize  the  returns 
were  to  a  hurtful  extent  in  sympathy  with  the  political 
aim  of  the  investigation.  .  .  It  is  this  summary  that  has 
spread  so  much  misinformation  throughout  the  country. 
Some  of  the  more  serious  errors  in  the  report  are  apparent 
upon  a  casual  examination.  When  any  one  at  all  familiar 
with  the  course  of  wages  in  recent  years  takes  up  the  re- 
port, he  is  astonished  to  see  that  the  wages  of  clerks  in 
stores  have  risen  out  of  all  proportion  to  wages  in  other 
industries.  In  the  metal  works,  as  he  would  expect,  cur- 
rency wages  are  reported  to  have  fallen  since  1873 ;  so,  too, 
in  the  cotton  factories;  but  in  stores,  where  the  invasion 


304  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 


of  women  and  girls  is  believed  to  have  depressed  wages  to 
an  unusual  extent,  he  finds  it  reported  that  an  advance  of 
nearly  40  per  cent,  has  taken  place.  If,  to  understand  the 
anomaly,  he  takes  the  trouble  to  consult  the  original  data, 
he  discovers  that  for  the  metal  works  and  cotton  factories 
the  returns  covered  many  establishments  and  many  hun- 
dred employees,  while  for  stores  the  returns  covered  but 
one  dry-goods  store  and  one  grocery,  employing  together 
less  than  30  clerks.  Yet  the  committee,  in  its  table  of 
^simple  averages  for  all  industries,'  made  the  uninvesti- 
gated industry  count  as  much  as  either  of  the  thoroughly 
investigated  ones.  And  the  committee  did  not  stop  here. 
Despite  this  assumed  rise  of  nearly  40  per  cent,  in  the 
wages  of  clerks,  the  table  of  ^simple  averages'  still  showed 
that  currency  wages  had  fallen  4  per  cent,  since  1873. 
Thereupon  the  committee  proceeded  to  make  a  table  of 
Sveighted  averages,'  assuming  that  the  incredible  ad- 
vance of  40  per  cent,  in  wages  had  been  received  by  all  the 
clerks  in  the  country,  and  that  since  these  outnumbered 
the  employees  in  metal  works  and  cotton  mills  put  to- 
gether, therefore  the  returns  for  less  than  30  clerks  ought 
to  outweigh  those  for  more  than  1,500  metal  workers  and 
more  than  3,000  cotton  operatives.  By  this  means  cur- 
rency wages  in  1891  were  made  to  rise  one  per  cent,  above 
the  level  in  1873. 

To  cut  short  the  criticism,  in  order  to  get  at  the  facts 
reported,  it  is  necessary  to  throw  away  the  work  done  by 
the  committee's  experts,  and  return  to  the  original  reports 
made  by  the  employers"  (16).* 

*  It  is  by  methods  thus  exposed  that  men  like  Mr.  Carroll  D,  Wright, 
whom  some  people  suppose  to  be  a  reliable  authority,  undertake  statistical 
demonstrations.  Mr.  H.  L.  Bliss,  an  expert  statistician,  and  contributor 
of  statistical  papers  to  the  American  Journal  of  Sociology  and  the  Journal 
of  Political  Economy,  does  not  hesitate  to  call  Mr.  Wright  a  very  serious 
name.  In  his  pamphlet  on  plutocratic  statistics,  Mr.  Bliss  writes :  "To 
Prof.  Small's  severe  criticism  Col.  Wright  has  attempted  no  reply  except 
in  a  personal  letter,  to  the  publication  of  which  he  refuses  his  consent. 
Yet  Col.  Wright  owes  it  to  the  public,  if  not  to  himself,  to  answer  criti- 
cisms that  tend  to  destroy  confidence  in  our  official  statistics  and  statis- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  305 

§  177. —  In  his  diagnosis  of  the  situation  here 
sketched,  the  socialist  lays  down  the  proposition  that  the 
poAver  of  the  upper  class  depends  mainly  upon  the  owner- 
ship and  monopoly  of  capital.  We  have  pointed  out  the 
considerations  that  part  us  from  the  disciples  of  Henry 
George;  and  we  shall  now  call  attention  to  those  that  dis- 
tinguish us  from  the  socialists. 

The  disciple  of  socialism  correctly  pictures  the  upper 
class  enjoying  a  monopoly  of  all,  or  most,  of  the  material 
capital  in  society  —  the  factory  buildings,  and  machines, 
and  tools,  and  appliances  of  all  kinds.  He  then  claims 
that  low  wages  and  the  industrial  struggle  for  existence 
are  due  to  the  fact  that  the  members  of  the  lower  class, 
possessing  little  or  no  material  capital,  are  forced  to  com- 
pete with  and  bid  against  each  other  for  an  opportunity  to 
labor  in  these  factories  and  use  these  tools  and  machines 
in  support  of  life.  According  to  the  socialist,  the  last 
word  and  final  summation  of  private  capitalism  is  the 
Trust.  "What  is  the  Trust?"  asks  Mr.  Daniel  DeLeon,  a 
New  York  socialist.  And  then  he  replies :  "The  Trust  is 
essentially  a  tool  of  production.  The  difference  between 
the  trust  and  the  oldest  style  of  privately  owned  tool,  seen 
now  only  in  museums,  is  a  difference,  not  of  kind,  but  of 
degree"  (17).  The  diagnosis  and  program  of  socialism  are 
attractive  and  very  dramatic.  The  upper  classes  own  the 
capital  without  which  the  masses  cannot  dig  a  living  from 
the  earth.  The  lower  classes,  continually  increasing  in 
number,  bid  against  each  other  and  force  wages  down  to 

ticians.  Col.  Wright  attempts  no  answer  because  no  other  answer  is 
possible  than  the  admission  that  he  is  the  official  liar  of  the  plutocratic 
class,  and  has  faithfully  discharged  the  duties  of  that  office.  The  writer 
sincerely  regrets  the  necessity  of  using  the  harsh  term  'liar,'  but  there 
is  no  other  word  applicable  to  the  case"  (Bliss,  Plutocracy's  Statistics, 
Chicago,  Chas.  H.  Kerr  and  Co.,  p.  9).  The  same  writer,  in  a  recent 
pamphlet  entitled  "Our  Juggled  Census,"  has  exposed  the  fallacious 
methods  adopted  in  connection  with  the  census  of  1900  for  the  purpose 
of  misleading  the  public  (The  Purdy  Publishing  Co.,  Madison  St.,  Chi- 
cago). 
20 


306  ^A^  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

the  lowest  level  at  which  they  can  live  and  reproduce. 
Ergo,  society  in  its  corporate  capacity  must  seize  the  cap- 
italistic plant.  In  other  words,  the  socialist  wants  the 
State,  the  people  in  their  collective  capacity,  to  assume  and 
operate  factories,  machines,  tools,  and  appliances  of  all 
kinds.  Would  he  have  the  State  seize  the  land?  Oh,  yes; 
of  course.  We  shall  need  land.  The  land  question,  he 
remarks  incidentally,  is  quite  important  in  its  way.  But 
the  private  monopoly  of  capital  is  the  great  underlying 
cause,  and  public  ownership  the  great  cure,  of  the  social 
problem.  Why  talk  about  land?  Anybody  can  get  land 
now!  Why,  you  can  get  farm  land  for  a  few  dollars  an 
acre. 

§  178. —  Let  us  inquire  how  far  Mr.  DeLeon  and  the 
socialists  are  right  in  their  identification  of  the  Trust  — 
"the  last  word  of  private  capitalism"  —  with  material 
tools.  The  Trust,  if  Mr.  DeLeon  is  right,  differs  only  in 
degree,  not  in  kind,  from  the  tools  of  the  Rough  Stone 
Age.    Let  us  see  how  far  he  is  right. 

The  great  steel  trust  is  capitalized  on  a  basis  of  one 
billion,  four  hundred  million  dollars  (|1,400,000,000). 
According  to  an  affidavit  filed  in  the  court  of  chancery  of 
New  Jersey  by  Mr.  Charles  M.  Schwab,  president  of  the 
trust,  the  earnings  for  the  preceding  year  were  one  hun- 
dred and  forty  million  dollars  (|140,  000,000).  This  is  an 
interest  of  10  per  cent  on  the  figures  given  above ;  so  that 
a  capitalization  of  one  billion,  four  hundred  million  dol- 
lars is  very  moderate. 

But  let  us  see  how  much  of  this  is  real  material  capi- 
tal. In  the  affidavit  mentioned,  Mr.  Schwab  gives  an  offi- 
cial schedule  of  the  steel  trust's  assets.  From  this  official 
schedule  it  is  evident  that  something  more  than  capital 
contributes  to  the  power  of  the  steel  trust.  That  factor  is 
land  monopoly.  The  assets  of  the  steel  trust,  like  the  as- 
sets of  the  upper  economic  class  in  general,  consist  not 
only  of  actual  capital,  but  of  large  and  exclusive  landed 
privileges.  The  schedule  by  Mr.  Schwab  consists  of  eight 
items.    The  items  into  which  the  factor  of  capital  princi- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  307 

pally  enters  are  as  below ;  but  it  should  be  premised  that 
even  in  these  the  element  of  land  monopoly  is  powerful. 
We  italicize  the  factor  of  exclusive  landed  privileges,  as 
far  as  possible,  in  the  items  following : 

STEEL   TRUST    CAPITAL. 

(a)  Plants,    mills,    fixtures,    machinery,   equipment,    tools 

and  real  estate  $300,000,000 

(b)  Transportation  properties,  including  railroads,   (1,467 

miles),    terminals,    docks,    ships    (112),   equipment 

(23,185  cars  and  428  locomotives)  ,  etc 80,000,000 

(c)  Blast  furnaces   48,000,000 

<d)     Cash  and  cash  assets  148,000,000 

From  which   must  be   deducted,    on   a  very  conservative  estimate, 
at  least  the  following  items : 

(e)  Real  estate  (estimated  from  item  "a"  above) 50,000,000 

(f)  Exclusive  land  privileges  implied  in  the  articles  "1,467 

miles  of  railroads;    terminals;    docks"  in  item  "b" 

above}    ., , 251,000,000 

Leaving  in  round  numbers  an  actual  capital  of  about $500,000,000 


Setting  down  the  value  of  the  landed  privileges  men- 
tioned above,  and  adding  the  remaining  four  items  of  Mr. 
Schwab's  official  schedule,  we  have : 

STEEL  TRUST  LAND  VALUES. 

(a)  Land  values  transferred  from  items  "a"  and  "b"  above, 

as  per  items  "e"  and  "f" $75,000,000 

(b)  Iron   and   Bessemer   ore    properties 700,000,000 

(c)  Coal  and  coke  fields  100,000,000 

(d)  Natural   gas   fields    20,000,i)00 

(e)  Limestone    properties    4,000,000 

Making  in  round  numbers  a  total  figure  for  land  values  of 

about    $900,000,000 


Thus  we  see  that  out  of  this  enormous  capitalization, 
representing  one  billion,  four  hundred  million  dollars  (f  1,- 
400,000,000),  the  element  of  land  monopoly  is  worth  at 
least  nine  hundred  million  (|900,000,000).  The  actual 
material  capital,  although  large  and  impressive  in  itself, 


308  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

is  small  in  comparison  with  the  extent  and  value  of  the 
landed  privileges. 

But  this  is  not  all.  The  land  monopoly  basis  of  the 
steel  trust  is  not  only  internal  to  it,  and  connected  with  its 
own  properties,  but  external  to  it  as  well.  The  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  of  the  United  States  has  shown 
that  the  trusts  derive  much  of  their  power  from  special 
favors  and  rebates  from  railroads.  In  1898  the  Commis- 
sion said:  "The  situation  has  become  intolerable,  both 
from  the  standpoint  of  the  public  and  the  carriers.  .  . 
Tariffs  are  disregarded,  discriminations  constantly  occur, 
and  the  price  at  which  transportation  can  be  obtained  is 
fluctuating  and  uncertain.  Railroad  managers  are  dis- 
trustful of  each  other,  and  shippers  all  the  while  in  doubt 
as  to  the  rates  secured  by  their  competitors."  Now  the 
value  of  railroads  consists  not  only  of  the  material  cap- 
ital in  the  cars,  tracks,  depots,  roadbed  improvements,  etc ; 
it  consists  even  more  largely  in  the  state-granted  privi- 
lege of  occupying  strips  of  land  running  for  many  thou- 
sand miles  through  country  and  city.  Railroads  are  sim- 
ply a  special  kind  of  improved  public  highway,  or  street. 
This  is  recognized  almost  universally  by  courts  of  law. 
The  United  States  Supreme  Court,  for  instance,  in  the 
case  of  Alcott  v.  Supervisors,  uttered  the  following 
through  Justice  Strong: 

"That  railroads,  though  constructed  by  private  cor- 
porations and  owned  by  them,  are  public  highways,  has 
been  the  doctrine  of  nearly  all  the  courts  since  such  con- 
veniences for  passage  and  transportation  have  had  any 
existence"  (18).  Of  the  aggregate  capital  value  of  rail- 
road bonds  and  stocks  in  prosperous  times,  it  has  been 
shown  that  about  one-half  represents  the  franchise  value, 
or  special  privilege  of  running  over  long  strips  of  land. 
The  report  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  for 
1897  shows  that  on  June  30,  1896,  outstanding  American 
railroad  bonds  and  stocks  aggregated  about  ten  billion, 
^ye  hundred  million  dollars  ($10,500,000,000),  this  being 
divided  about  equally  between  stocks  and  bonds.    The  sta- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  —  (Continued). 


tistical  report  of  this  Commission  for  1890  had  said  "that 
in  a  rough  way  bonds  represent  the  certain  or  rock-bot- 
tom value  of  railway  property,  while  stocks  represent  their 
speculative  value"  (19).  Thus  we  see  that  when  the  steel 
trust  and  other  trusts  get  special  favors  and  rebates  from 
railroads,  their  power  is  to  this  extent  based  on  land  mo- 
nopoly. 

But  this,  too,  is  not  all;  for,  besides  their  monopoli- 
zation of  natural  resources  and  special  railroad  favors, 
many  of  the  trusts  are  sheltered  by  tariff  laws.  These 
laws  impose  taxes  upon  the  species  of  goods  made  by  the 
trust,  and  in  this  way  either  stifle  competition  by  exclud- 
ing foreign  goods  of  that  description,  or  increase  their 
price  to  the  domestic  consumer,  and  consequently  raise  the 
price  of  the  goods  made  by  the  trust. 

And  what,  now,  has  become  of  the  socialist  claim  that 
the  Trust  is  only  a  tool,  differing  in  degree  but  not  in  kind 
from  the  tools  of  the  Kough  Stone  Age?  How  far  is  Mr. 
DeLeon's  proposition  sustained  by  an  appeal  to  the  facts? 

In  opposition  to  the  socialist,  the  single  taxer  claims 
that  the  power  of  the  trust,  and  of  the  upper  economic 
class  in  general,  rests,  not  upon  private  capital,  but 
mainly  upon  private  property  in  franchises  to  the  exclu- 
sive enjoyment  of  landed  rights,  including  vast  unim- 
proved natural  resources  and  railroad  franchises.  The 
evolutionary  single  taxer  claims  that  private  capital  is  an 
effect,  not  a  cause,  of  cleavage.  The  conventional  social- 
istic treatment  of  private  capitalism  deals  thus  with  ef- 
fects rather  than  with  causes. 

§  179. —  In  attempting  to  deal  with  the  modern  social 
problem,  socialism  proposes: 

Governmentalize  everything :  factories,  fields,  mines, 
machines,  tools,  and  railroads. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  evolutionary  single  taxer  says, 
partly  in  harmony  with  Henry  George,  and  partly  not : 

Society  is  a  collectivism,  or  socialism,  developing  un- 
der the  forms  of  individualism.  Capital  is  almost  entirely 
a  social  product  of  past  and  present  generations,  and  its 


310  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

value  should  accrue  to  society  in  the  largest  possible  de- 
gree.—  But  by  what  means? 

At  present  the  lower  classes  are  plainly  exploited  by 
capitalists;  and  the  larger  capitalists,  at  least,  are  build- 
ing palaces  and  living  in  luxury,  while  poverty  is  increas- 
ing among  the  masses. 

But  the  hurtful  power  of  the  upper  class  does  not 
rest  upon  the  monopoly  of  capital,  for,  in  spite  of  claims 
to  the  contrary,  capital  is  not  naturally  monopolistic. 
There  is,  indeed,  a  vast  amount  of  capital  in  society. 
Without  the  material  and  intangible  forms  of  capital,  so- 
ciety would  fall  apart,  and  revert  to  the  primitive  strug- 
gle for  existence,  in  which  men  were  scattered  about  in 
small  groups,  depending  for  food  upon  a  precarious  nat- 
ural supply,  and  fighting  with  the  lower  animals  and  with 
their  own  kind  for  the  means  of  life.  But  although  there 
is  a  tremendous  amount  of  social  capital,  it  is  not,  and 
cannot  be,  in  its  character  as  capital,  aggregated  in  one  or 
a  few  monopolistic  masses.  Enthusiasts  claim  that  the 
larger  and  larger  the  mass  of  aggregated  capital,  the 
more  and  more  efficient  it  is  from  every  standpoint.  This 
law,  however,  holds  only  up  to  a  certain  point  beyond 
which  the  greater  law  of  diminishing  returns  limits  the 
efficiency  of  capitalistic  aggregates.  The  largest  possible 
efficient  aggregates  of  capital  in  society  are  small  in  com- 
parison with  the  total  mass  of  capital.  This  total  capi- 
tal exists  (first)  in  the  form  of  widely  distributed  ma- 
terial plants,  machines,  and  tools  of  all  descriptions ;  and 
(second)  in  the  form  of  a  vast  amount  of  technical  knowl- 
edge and  training  in  the  minds  and  bodies  of  many  experts. 

The  socially  hurtful  monopoly  enjoyed  by  capitalists 
is  due  to  the  vast  empire  of  landed  privileges  associated 
'  with  capital.  Three  or  four  huge  capitalistic  establish- 
ments, five  hundred  miles  apart,  cannot  form  a  natural 
monopoly  in  the  absence  of  special  landed  privileges.  But 
connect  them  by  long  strips  of  land  over  which  they  pos- 
sess exclusive  rights  of  way;  extend  these  rights  of  way 
here  and  there  all  through  the  social  mass;  give  their 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  (Continued).  311 

holders  exclusive  possession  of  natural  sources  of  supply 
in  the  earth,  so  that  they  can,  while  working  a  small  cor- 
ner of  a  great  field,  prevent  competition  from  developing 
any  part  of  the  rest;  —  give  capitalists  all  these  govern- 
ment-protected privileges;  make  the  situation  here  de- 
scribed universal ;  and  it  will  truly  seem  as  if  capital  were 
a  natural  monopoly.  There  is  nothing  to  prove  the  so- 
cialistic doctrine  of  the  natural  monopoly  of  private  capi- 
talism, for  private  capital  has  never  yet  stood  on  its  feet 
in  human  society  without  having  its  feet  planted  on  some 
form  of  special  privilege. 

Therefore,  preserve  the  individualistic  psychology  of 
society.  Let  individuals,  under  the  spur  of  immediate  self- 
interest,  acting  singly  and  in  voluntary  associations  as 
large  as  can  successfully  be  formed,  —  let  individuals  re- 
tain the  ownership  and  proprietorship  of  capital  as  a 
matter  of  present  social  expediency ;  but  — 

Kemove  taxation  from  capital  and  all  other  forms 
of  labor  products.  Concentrate  it  upon  the  value  of  both 
used  and  unused  land,  collecting  for  public  purposes  part 
or  all  of  the  rent  of  occupied  ground,  and  throwing  unim- 
proved land  everywhere  in  country  and  city  open  to  capital 
at  one  charge,  instead  of  two,  as  at  present.  At  the  same 
time,  tax  railroads  on  the  full  value  of  their  special  and 
exclusive  highway  rights ;  and  for  their  bare  value  as  ma- 
terial capital  compensate  their  present  owners,  raising 
the  railway  system  to  the  plane  of  public  ownership  and 
operation  like  other  public  highways.  In  the  same  way, 
socialize  the  other  industries,  like  the  telegraph,  street 
railroad,  telephone,  street  lighting,  etc.,  which  depend  for 
vitality  upon  government-protected  privileges  of  laying 
tracks  and  stretching  wires  over  long  strips  of  land.  Let 
society  in  its  corporate  capacity,  acting  through  govern- 
ment, hold  open  impartially  to  all  comers  the  great  public 
lines  of  travel,  transportation,  and  communication,  per- 
mitting no  speculation  in  the  resources  of  nature  —  no 
corner  in  the  vast  empire  of  unused  building,  farming,  and 
mining  land. 


312  AN   EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

If  these  measures  are  judiciously  introduced,  there 
seems  to  be  nothing  unreasonable  about  them.  We  have 
seen  the  steps  taken  in  several  i)laces  toward  the  single  tax 
on  land  values ;  while  the  social  ownership  and  operation 
of  railroads,  as  well  as  other  public  utilities  depending 
upon  landed  privileges,  is  a  common  and  successful  policy 
in  many  of  the  most  civilized  communities,  like  Germany 
and  Australia.  In  order  to  effect  a  consistent  social  re- 
form, however,  the  entire  program  should  be  instituted. 
One  part  without  the  other  is  incomplete. 

With  reference  to  railroads,  etc..  Justice  Brown,  of 
the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  says:  "If  the  govern- 
ment may  be  safely  entrusted  with  the  transmission  of  our 
letters  and  papers,  I  see  no  reason  why  it  may  not  also  be 
trusted  with  the  transmission  of  our  telegrams  and  par- 
cels, as  is  almost  universally  the  case  in  Europe,  or  of  our 
passengers  and  freight  through  a  state  ownership  of  rail- 
ways, as  in  Germany,  France,  Austria,  Sweden,  and  Nor- 
way. If  the  state  owns  its  highways,  why  may  it  not  also 
own  its  railways?"  (20). 

By  some  people  the  example  of  the  United  States  Post 
Office  Department  is  made  a  matter  of  objection  against 
the  governmental  ownership  and  operation  of  railways  in 
America.  The  Post  Office  Department  shows  a  deficit 
which  has  to  be  made  up  from  general  taxation  each  year. 
Here,  it  is  claimed,  is  a  fact  which  tells  very  strongly 
against  the  governmental  operation  of  railroads.  But  how 
many  such  people  know  that  the  railways  charge  the  gov- 
ernment enough  annual  rent  for  the  mail  cars  that  it  uses 
to  pay  the  cost  of  each  car  outright?  Postmaster-General 
Vilas  called  attention  to  this  in  his  report  of  1887.  He 
showed  that  the  432  cars  then  in  use  could  be  purchased 
in  open  market,  or  duplicates  manufactured,  for  about 
11,600,000 ;  and  that  the  government  was  then  paying  the 
railways  |1,880,000  annual  rent  for  these  cars.  He  rec- 
ommended government  ownership  of  mail  cars;  but  his 
recommendation  was  not  acted  upon.  In  addition  to  this 
exorbitant  rent  for  cars,  the  railways  also  make  an  enor- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  —  (Continued).  313 

mous  overcharge  for  transportation  of  the  mails.  There 
has  been  a  postal  deficit  each  year  since  Postmaster-Gen- 
eral Vilas  made  the  report  mentioned  above.  After  mak- 
ing a  careful  inquiry,  the  New  York  World,  on  February 
2,  1897,  said :  "The  railroads  of  the  United  States  are  de- 
frauding and  overcharging  the  government  to  the  extent 
of  $10,000,000  per  annum,  and  this  public  plunder  is  going 
on  while  statesmen  and  debaters  at  Washington  are  va- 
cantly going  about  for  means  whereby  they  may  avoid  a 
deficit  of  18,000,000  per  annum  in  running  the  post  office 
department"  (21).  Honest  administration,  based  on  the  law 
of  reciprocal  service,  would  convert  the  American  Post 
Office  into  a  paying  institution ;  and  the  present  mail  rates 
could  even  be  reduced. 

§  180. —  If  the  single  taxer  is  right,  the  effect  of  his 
program  will  be  to  cut  the  claws  of  monopoly.  In  order  to 
picture  the  effect  of  his  measures,  it  will  be  well  to  recur 
to  the  diagram  above. 

We  see  masses  of  material  capital,  money,  technical 
knowledge  and  training  scattered  over  one  end  of  a  huge 
field  which  represents  natural  resources.  The  application 
of  the  heavy  tax  upon  land  values,  and  the  removal  of 
taxes  from  capital,  making  it  much  easier  to  invest  capital 
than  under  the  present  system,  is  supposed  to  stimulate 
men  to  invest  their  own  and  borrowed  capital  with  more 
freedom  than  at  present  in  all  kinds  of  enterprise  — 
farms,  mines,  dwelling  houses,  business  blocks,  facto- 
ries, etc. 

This,  in  turn,  increases  the  supply  of  work,  and  ab- 
sorbs the  artificial  "surplus"  of  labor  which  is  now  either 
idle  during  industrial  depressions,  or  employed  at  low 
wages  during  prosperous  times.  Where  the  artificially 
decreased  supply  of  work  formerly  raised  the  price  of 
work,  increasing  the  amount  of  labor  which  the  workman 
must  pay  for  the  opportunity  to  Avork,  the  case  is  now  re- 
versed. The  increased  supply  of  work  on  the  "job  mar- 
ket" naturally  forces  down  the  price  of  "jobs;"  and  the 
workman  gives  less  labor  for  the  same  compensation,  or, 


314  AN  EXAMINATION   OF   SOCIETY. 

what  is  the  same  thing,  receives  higher  wages  for  the  same 
work.  There  are  no  unemployed,  or  partially  employed, 
laborers  to  bid  against  each  other  for  a  chance  to  work  at 
small  wages. 

At  the  same  time,  taxation  being  now  adjusted  ac- 
cording to  site  value,  there  is  no  shifting  of  tax  burdens 
from  the  larger  to  the  smaller  owners  and  borrowers  of 
capital,  as  at  present.  We  have  seen  that  under  the  pres- 
ent system  farmers  pay  far  more  in  proportion  than  do 
city  people,  and  smaller  holders  everywhere  more  in  pro- 
portion than  larger  holders.  This  reform  in  the  collec- 
tion of  government  revenue  would  therefore  mean  that 
borrowed  capital  could  be  more  quickly  acquired  in  own- 
ership than  under  the  present  system.  Farmers  and  small 
property  holders  would  pay  less  to  the  State  under  the 
single  tax  than  they  now  pay. 

At  the  same  time,  also,  the  increased  amount  of  labor 
products  and  money  in  the  hands  of  the  laboring  people 
would  make  them  less  keen  for  "low  prices''  in  the  retail 
stores,  thus  relaxing  the  jug-handled  competition  of  retail 
traders,  and  consequently  of  jobbers.  Under  the  present 
system,  the  retailer  must  resort  to  "sales,''  and  adultera- 
tion, and  handle  poor  goods,  etc.  Likewise  the  manufac- 
turer and  jobber.  Everybody  knows  how  difficult  it  is  to 
procure  good  articles  of  certain  kinds ;  but  everybody  says, 
"What  are  you  going  to  do  about  it?"  If  the  masses  of  the 
working  people  had  more  labor  products  and  money  in 
their  hands,  they  would  refuse  to  buy  poor  goods;  and 
manufacturers  would  have  to  make  better  goods. 

After  the  inauguration  of  the  single  tax  program,  cap- 
ital could  be  combined  into  the  largest  efficient  masses; 
but  throughout  the  community  at  large  there  would  be  no 
means  by  which  all  or  a  majority  of  capitalists  could  com- 
bine to  push  prices  up  and  push  wages  down.  There  could 
be  no  secret  rebates  and  special  favors  from  railroads, 
whereby  a  ring  of  shippers  could  combine  and  undersell 
independent  shippers ;  for  the  railroads,  as  is  now  the  case 
in  many  civilized  countries,  would  then  be  treated  as  im- 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION—  {Continued).  315- 

proved  public  highways  over  which  all  must  pay  the  same 
toll.  There  could  be  no  monopolizing  of  natural  resources, 
whereby  only  a  small  portion  of  nature  is  developed  by  a 
ring  of  capitalists  and  the  remainder  of  nature  is  fenced 
away  from  other  capitalists  and  laborers.  Capitalists  who 
were  developing,  say,  the  one  thousandth  part  of  a  great 
coal  field  could  not  raise  the  price  above  a  certain  figure 
without  attracting  other  capital  into  the  i^^-monopolized 
fields.  At  present,  the  occupying  coal  company,  or  all  oc- 
cupying companies  together,  hold  an  enormous  amount  of 
coal  territory,  work  a  small  part  of  it,  pay  little  or  no  tax 
on  the  unused  coal  deposits,  —  yet  hold  these  vacant  de- 
posits against  other  capitalists  at  a  high  price.  If  others^ 
choose  to  pay  the  price,  these  other  capitalists  know  that 
they  must  then  submit  to  heavy  taxation  on  the  property 
which  they  improve  and  develop.  Under  the  land  value 
tax,  the  present  holders  and  monopolizers  could  not  afford 
to  retain  the  unused  property;  and  other  capitalists  could 
open  new  mines  at  half  or  less  than  half  the  present  initial 
expense.  This  opening  of  land,  it  must  be  remembered, 
'  would  be  universal  under  the  proposed  reform. 

The  situation  can  be  condensed  into  even  fewer  words 
as  follows :  Our  present  system  of  property  and  of  taxa- 
tion operates  unconsciously  to  establish  everywhere  in 
civilized  society  an  informal  Earth  Trust.  It  is  the  Earth 
Trust  that  lies  unperceived  at  the  heart  of  the  present  in- 
dustrial problem.  It  is  the  Earth  Trust  that  gives  vitality 
to  capitalistic  trusts.  If  the  Earth  Trust  were  abolished, 
capitalists  could  not  combine  from  one  end  of  a  country  to 
another  for  purposes  of  extortion.  The  self-interest  of 
capitalists  would  be  turned  against  itself,  and  forced  to 
compete  for  the  public  good. 

Probably  it  would  not  be  necessary  to  tax  land  up  to 
its  full  value  in  order  to  collect  sufficient  revenue  for  gov- 
ernment. 

There  is  no  present  need  for  discussing  the  problems 
that  would  arise  in  a  single  tax  community.  There  will 
never  be  a  time  in  human  history  when  there  will  not  be 


516  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

problems  of  some  kind ;  and  we  are  here  viewing  the  single 
tax  program  as  a  step  in  the  conscious  evolution  of 
society.* 

§181. —  The  state  of  the  public  mind  with  reference  to 
current  problems  is  one  of  confusion.  Perhaps  there  has 
never  been  a  more  discordant  medley  of  opinions. 
Throughout  a  large  part  of  western  civilization  the  in- 
creasing social  stress  has  forced  a  further  political  devel- 
opment. We  have  seen  that  the  Clan  State  passed  long  ago 
into  the  State  based  on  property  regardless  of  descent. 
The  nineteenth  century  witnessed  the  establishment  of 
manhood  suffrage.  Doubtless  the  twentieth  century  will 
see  womanhood  suffrage  likewise.  This  practical  en- 
franchisement of  the  lower  economic  class  is  a  result  of 
the  blind  struggles  of  that  class  against  the  evils  which, 
along  with  the  growth  of  every  civilization,  issue  in  lux- 
ury at  one  extreme  of  the  social  scale  and  poverty  at  the 
other.  The  social  problem  no  longer  finds  expression  in 
theological  terms.  Church  and  State  are  either  legally  or 
practically  divorced  throughout  the  larger  part  of  west- 
ern civilization  —  since  disestablishment  and  the  tolera- 

*  If  the  single  tax  is  a  wise  program,  it  excludes  all  compensation 
to  landowners.  In  order  to  compensate  landowners,  it  would  be  neces- 
sary to  issue  bonds  equal  to  the  value  of  all  the  improved  and  vacant 
land  now  held  by  private  persons.  It  would  then  be  necessary  to  pay 
annual  interest  on  these  bonds  equal  to  the  present  annual  value  of 
the  land.  The  usual  amount  of  revenue  for  governmental  purposes 
would  have  to  be  raised  also;  and  society  would  thus  fare  worse  than 
at  present.  We  do  not  deny  that  the  single  tax  would  at  first  perhaps 
tend  to  make  a  breach  in  the  present  ethical  sense  of  society;  but  it  is 
becoming  apparent  that  the  present  ethical  sense  of  society  is  based  on 
very  insecure  foundations.  The  earlier  single  tax  advocate  said  that  his 
program  would  conserve  the  present  ethical  sense.  He  said  that  no 
compensation  should  be  given  for  land  because  "the  value  of  land  is  due 
to  no  individual  exertions  or  labors,  but  to  nature  and  society."  The 
single  tax  argument  shows  that  capital  ought  to  be  left  in  private  hands 
at  present  (and  perhaps  always),  as  a  matter  of  expediency;  but 
capital,  as  our  inquiry  shows,  is  due  as  much  to  forces  outside  the  in- 
dividual as  land  values  are.  Conduct  on  the  part  of  individuals  or 
society  is  right  because  it  is  good;    not  good  because  right. 


WESTERN  CIVILIZATION  —  (Continued) .  317 

tion  of  non-conformity  have  the  same  social  issue.  It  is 
not  necessary  to  set  forth  here  the  sequence  of  cause  and 
effect  which  has  led  to  the  separation  of  Church  and  State. 
This  is  a  novel  fact  in  history.  But  the  essential  involu- 
tions of  the  history  leading  up  to  it  reveal  nothing  of  nov- 
elty in  the  working  of  human  nature.  If  Church  and 
State  were  still  united,  the  present  social  question  would, 
of  course,  take  a  theological  form  or  flavor.  Superfi- 
cial observers,  looking  back  on  the  present  from  the 
future,  would  then  put  a  theological  interpretation  on 
strikes,  tariff  disputes,  anti-trust  agitations,  trade  un- 
ionism, etc.  But  since  the  old  regime  no  longer  ob- 
tains, there  is  no  opportunity  for  the  ancient  inter- 
pretation. It  is  natural  that,  on  the  whole,  the  enfran- 
chised millions  should  be  uncertain  as  to  the  proper  ex- 
ercise of  their  newly  acquired  power.  It  is  natural  that 
the  attention  of  the  masses  should  at  first  focus  upon  cap- 
ital rather  than  upon  land,  since  capital  is  a  more  dra- 
matic factor  than  land.  Hence  the  growing  popularity  of 
socialism  in  Europe  and  America.  In  the  meantime  the 
great  political  parties,  having  exhausted  their  earlier  is- 
sues, reflect  by  their  uncertainty  the  confusion  of  the  pub- 
lic thought.  Despite  the  recent  revelations  of  science,  and 
the  spread  of  socialism,  the  psychology  of  society  is,  on  the 
whole,  individualistic.  There  is  ignorance  of  the  essen- 
tially collectivistic  nature  of  society.  Although  everybody 
walks  about  on  the  earth,  and  although  everything  that  we 
use  comes  from  the  land,  there  seems  to  be  a  profound 
public  unconsciousness  that  the  social  question  has  any- 
thing to  do  with  land.*    From  all  that  the  psychology  of 

*  The  movement  for  the  heavy  taxation  of  land  values  is  numerically- 
far  behind  the  socialist  movement.  It  counts  among  its  adherents  Lyman 
Abbott;  E.  Benjamin  Andrews;  Charles  Francis  Adams;  Count  Leo 
Tolstoy;  Hamlin  Garland;  Governor  Garvin,  of  Rhode  Island;  Mayor 
Johnson,  of  Cleveland,  Ohio;  Judge  Moran,  of  the  Chicago  Bar.  Two 
of  the  great  English  Reviews  —  The  Fortnightly,  for  January,  1899, 
and  The  Westminster,  for  April,  1899— -have  published  outspoken. 
articles  championing  the  movement. 


518  AN  EXAMINATION   OF  SOCIETY. 

present  society  reveals,  one  would  think  that  history  is, 
indeed,  "a  ghost-dance  on  a  floor  of  clouds.''  As  the 
twentieth  century  opens,  all  the  characteristics  of  later 
nineteenth  century  thought  persist ;  but  signs  are  not  lack- 
ing that  we  are  about  to  enter  a  new  era. 

(1)— George,  Social  Problems  (N.  Y.,  1893),  pp.  40-45.  Cf. 
Bryce,  The  American  Commonwealth  (N.  Y.,  1891),  II,  p.  717f.  Cf. 
Mackenzie,  Introduction  to  Social  Philosophy  (Glasgow,  1895),  pp.  99- 
100. 

(2)  —  Cf.  Dictionary  of  National  Biography,  under  names  "Dove" 
and  "Spence." 

(3)  —In  an  article  entitled  "The  Single  Tax:  What  It  is,  and  Why 
We  Urge  it." 

(4) — The  American  Journal  of  Sociology  (Chicago),  I,  pp.  279- 
281. 

(5)  —  Bagehot,  Physics  and  Politics,  p.  74. 

(6)  —  We  take  this  case,  and  the  quotation,  from  Mr.  G.  J.  Bryan's 
illuminating  booklet,  "Practical  Effects  of  Advances  in  Tax  Law,"  pub- 
lished by  F.  Vierth,  Cedar  Rapids,  Iowa,  1902,  pp.  12,  13. 

(7)  —The  National  Single  Taxer  (N.  Y.,  Jan.,  1900),  p.  5 

(8)  —  From  The  Deutsche  Volksstimme,  through  the  Melbourne 
.Beacon,  Australia,  May  1,  1898. 

(9)  —  Cf.  Report  of  the  Special  State  Revenue  Commission  of  Colo- 
rado (Second  ed.),  p.  49. 

(10)  —Municipal  Affairs  Quarterly  (N.  Y.,  June,.  1899),  p.  332f. 

(11)  —  Cf.  Financial  Reform  Almanack  (Liverpool,  1899). 
(12)— Booth,  Life  and  Labor  of  the  People   (London  1892-1897). 

(13)  — Spahr,  The  Present  Distribution  of  Wealth  (N.  Y.,  1896), 
pp.  83,  84. 

(14)  — Eighth  Biennial  Report  of  the  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics  of 
Illinois  (Springfield,  111.,  second  ed.,  1896),  p.  89. 

(15)  —The  Outlook  (N.  Y.),  LXVII,  pp.  89,  90. 

(16)  —  Spahr,  Distribution  of  Wealth,  pp.  106,  107. 
(17)— Labor  Library   (N.  Y.,  Oct.  1902),  XII,  No.  10,  p.  3. 
(18)— United  States  Supreme  Court  Reports  (16  Wallace),  p.  678. 

(19)  —  Statistical  Report  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission 
<1890),  p.  47. 

(20)  —Forum  (N.  Y.),  XIX,  p.  649. 

(21) — Cf.  the  pamphlet  "Finance  and  Transportation,"  by  J.  D. 
Miller  (Oak  Park,  111.,  1898).  Cf.  North  American  Review,  June,  1902, 
pp.  816,  817. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

This  list  is  not  intended  for  scholars,  but  for  those  readers  who 
desire  a  further  systematic  introduction  to  the  general  subject.  It  is 
merely  suggestive;  and  makes  no  pretension  to  exhaustiveness.  The 
works  named  can  be  found  in  public  libraries,  or  can  be  purchased 
through  booksellers.  Lists,  prices,  etc.,  will  be  promptly  furnished 
by  Brentano's  Bookstore,   New  York  City. 

A  careful  account  of  the  beginnings  and  development  of  sociology 
will  be  found  in  Small  and  Vincent,  An  Introduction  to  the  Study  of 
Society.  In  connection  with  this  the  following  handbooks  may  be 
taken  up.  Spencer,  The  Study  of  Sociology.  Fairbanks,  An  Introduc- 
tion to  Sociology.  Ward,  Outlines  of  Sociology.  Giddings,  The  Theory 
of  Socialization.  Idem,  The  Elements  of  Sociology.  No  exact  order 
can  be  given  in  which  these,  and  books  to  be  named  below,  should  be 
taken  up.  The  reader  should  not  limit  himself  to  any  one  work;  but 
should  use  as  many  as  possible,  seeking  a  well  rounded  view.  From  these 
works  the  reader  should  pass  to  larger  treatises :  Spencer,,  The  Principles 
of  Sociology.  Ward,  Dynamic  Sociology.  Idem,  The  Psychic  Factors 
of  Civilization.  Ross,  Social  Control.  On  the  political  phase  of  society 
-see,  in  the  following  order :  Wilson,  The  State,  or  Elements  of  Historical 
and  Practical  Politics.  Willoughby,  The  Nature  of  the  State.  Blunt- 
scHLi^  Theory  of  the  State.  On  the  economic  phase  of  society,  see  the 
introductions  by  Ely  and  by  Bullock^  and  the  larger  works  by  Hadley 
and  by  Marshall.  On  the  domestic  phase  of  society,  see  Starcke,  The 
Primitive   Family.     Westermarcke,  History  of  Human   Marriage. 

Attention  to  the  evidences  for  the  evolution  of  mankind  should 
precede  further  historical  study  of  society.  For  this  use:  Clodd,  A 
Primer  of  Evolution.  Romanes^  Darwin  and  after  Darwin.  Conn^  Evo- 
lution of  Today.     Morris^  Man  and  His  Ancestor. 

Passing  to  the  prehistoric  age  of  society;  the  following  books  will 
be  found  of  service:  Clodd,  The  Story  of  Primitive  Man.  Lubbock^ 
Prehistoric  Times.  Idem,  The  Origin  of  Civilization.  Keary,  The  Dawn 
of  History.    Tylor,  The  Early  History  of  Mankind. 

Turning  away  from  prehistoric  society  toward  historic  times,  use: 
Morgan,  Ancient  Society.  Maine,  Ancient  Law.  Idem,  Early  History 
of  Institutions.     Idem,  Early  Law  and  Custom. 

In  taking  up  the  earliest  of  the  great  historic  circles  of  communities, 
the  two  handbooks  following  will  be  found  useful:  Goodspeed,  History 
of  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians.  Breasted,  History  of  the  Egyptians. 
These  should  be  followed  by:  Maspero,  Life  in  Ancient  Egypt  and 
Assyria,  Erman,  Life  in  Ancient  Egypt.  Sayce,  Babylonians  and  As- 
syrians, Their  Life  and  Customs.  Reverting  to  the  more  strictly  his- 
torical treatment,  the  following  larger  works  may  now  be  studied:  Mas- 
pero,  The  Dawn  of  Civilization.     Idem,   The   Struggle  of  the   Nations. 

(319) 


320  BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


Idem,  The  Passing  of  the  Empires.     Rogers,  History  of  Babylonia  and 
Assyria. 

Before  taking  up  the  study  of  Israel's  history  and  religion,  it  is 
necessary  to  consider  the  origin  and  earlier  development  of  religion  in 
general.  The  following  books  will  serve  as  a  good  introduction;  and 
perhaps  the  order  given  is  as  good  as  any.  Allen,  The  Evolution  of  the 
Idea  of  God.  The  special  chapters  on  the  religion  of  Israel  and  Chris- 
tianity in  this  work  are  insufficient,  and  may  be  passed  over;  but  the 
general  treatment  is  good.  Fiske,  The  Idea  of  God.  Clodd,  The  Child- 
hood of  Religions.  Brace,  The  Unknown  God.  Brinton,  The  Religions 
of  Primitive  Peoples.  Keary,  Outlines  of  Primitive  Belief.  Menzies, 
History  of  Religion.  Geden,  Studies  in  Comparative  Religion.  Robert- 
son Smith,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites.  Barton,  Semitic  Origins,  social 
and  religious. 

The  last  two  books  in  the  preceding  paragraph  directly  introduce 
the  general  subject  of  the  early  religion  of  Israel.  This  is  further  treated 
in:  Budde,  The  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile.  Montefiore,  The  Re- 
ligion of  the  Ancient  Hebrews. 

By  way  of  introduction  to  the  history  of  Israel,  us'e  G.  A.  Smith, 
Historical  Geography  of  Palestine.  Paton,  Early  History  of  Syria  and 
Palestine.  Fiske,  The  Myths  of  Israel.  Ryle,  The  Early  Narratives  of 
Genesis.  Gunkel,  The  Legends  of  Genesis.  Robertson  Smith,  The  Old 
Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church.  Ryle,  The  Canon  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Driver,  An  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. The  entire  history  is  taken  up  in  brief  in :  Wellhausen,  His- 
tory of  Tudah  and  Israel.  Cornil,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel.  At 
greater  length  in:  Kent,  History  of  the  Hebrew  People.  Idem,  His- 
tory of  the  Jewish  People.  McCurdy,  History,  Prophecy,  and  the  Monu- 
ments. See  also  G.  F.  Moore,  Commentary  on  Judges,  for  material  on 
social  conditions.  H.  P.  Smith,  Commentary  on  Samuel.  A  late  mod- 
ern translation  of  the  Bible  should  be  used  in  connection  with  these 
works.  For  general  reference,  Cheyne  and  Black,  Encyclopedia  Biblica. 
Hastings,  Bible  Dictionary. 

The  above  works  will  furnish  an  introductory  view  of  the  vital 
subject  of  prophecy  in  its  relations  to  Israel's  history.  But  a  more  special 
study  of  the  prophets  is  necessary.  For  this,  begin  with  Cornil,  The 
Prophets  of  Israel.  A  more  detailed  treatment  is  found  in  Kirk- 
patrick.  The  Doctrine  of  the  Prophets.  This  should  be  followed  by 
Robertson  Smith,  The  Prophets  of  Israel  (Cheyne's  ed.).  G.  A.  Smith, 
The  Book  of  the  Twelve  Prophets.  For  individual  prophets:  Driver, 
Isaiah,  His  Life  and  Times.  Cheyne,  Introduction  to  the  Book  of  Isaiah. 
G.  A.  Smith,  The  Book  of  Isaiah. 

Turning  to  the  classic  civilization,  a  general  view  should  first  be 
obtained  through  handbooks  on  Greece  and  Rome:  Mahaffy,  A  Survey 
of  Greek  Civilization.     Botsford,   A  History  of  Greece.     Pelham,  Out- 


BIBLIOGRAPHY.  321 


lines  of  Roman  History.  How  and  Leigh,  A  History  of  Rome  to  the 
Death  of  Caesar.  Fowler,  The  City  State  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans.  Bees- 
ley,  The  Gracchi,  etc.  Larger  works:  Duncker,  History  of  Greece.  Cur- 
Tius,  same  title.  Abbott,  same  title.  Mommsen,  History  of  Rome.  Long, 
Decline  of  the  Roman  Republic.     Gibbon,  Decline  of  the  Roman  Empire. 

By  way  of  preliminary  to  the  study  of  Christianity  in  classic  civiliza- 
tion, use:  Mathews,  History  of  New  Testament  Times  in  Palestine. 
Wady-Moss,  Malachi  to  Matthew.  A  more  extensive  treatment :  Schurer, 
The  Jewish  People  in  the  Time  of  Jesus  Christ.  Graetz,  History  of  the 
Jews.  Leading  out  from  Israel  to  Christianity:  Toy,  Judaism  and  Chris- 
tianity. 

On  the  critical  treatment  of  the  Gospels,  see  Cone,  Gospel  Criticism 
and  Historical  Christianity.  Bacon,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament. 
On  the  life  and  teachings  of  Jesus :  Stevens,  The  Teaching  of  Jesus. 
Cone,  The  Gospel  and  its  Earliest  Interpretations.  Fairbairn,  Studies  in 
the  Life  of  Christ.  Rogers,  The  Life  and  Teachings  of  Jesus.  Mathews^, 
The  Social  Teaching  of  Jesus. 

On  the  apostolic  age,  etc.,  the  following  are  useful :  McGiffert,  His- 
tory of  Christianity  in  the  Apostolic  Age.  Bartlet,  The  Apostolic  Age. 
Weizscacker,  The  Apostolic  Age.  Cone,  Paul,  the  Man,  Missionary  and 
Teacher.  Bruce,  Paul's  Conception  of  Christianity.  Sabatier,  The 
Apostle  Paul.  Ramsay,  St.  Paul,  the  Traveller  and  Roman  Citizen.  On 
the  general  history  of  the  Church :  Fisher,  History  of  the  Christian 
Church.    Idem,  History  of  Christian  Doctrine. 

An  excellent  introductory  survey  of  western  civilization  will  be 
found  in  Adams,  Civilization  During  the  Middle  Ages.  Use  also:  Em- 
erton.  Introduction  to  the  Middle  Ages.  Idem,  Mediaeval  Europe.. 
Thatcher  and  Schwill,  Europe  in  the  Middle  Age.  Although  old,. 
Hallam,  Europe  During  the  Middle  Ages,  is  still  valuable  in  connectioa 
with  other  works. 

On  various  countries :  Adams,  Growth  of  the  French  Nation.  Kit- 
chin,  History  of  France.  Henderson,  Germany  in  the  Middle  Agjs 
Idem,  A  Short  History  of  Germany.  Motley,  Rise  of  the  Dutch  Re- 
public. Blok,  History  of  the  Netherlands.  Green,  History  of  the  Eng- 
lish People.  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England.  For  modern 
European  history  in  general,  see  the  excellent  single  volume  work  by 
Schwill,  The  History  of  Modern  Europe,  which  contains  useful  bibli- 
ographies. For  European  history  during  the  nineteenth  century:  An- 
drews, The  Historical  Development  of  Modern  Europe.  Seignobos,  The 
Political  History  of  Europe  Since  1814. 

On  economic  history:  Ashley,  English  Economic  History.  Rog- 
ers, Six  Centuries  of  Work  and  Wages.  Cunningham,  Growth  of  Eng- 
lish Industry  and  Commerce.  Gross,  The  Gild  Merchant.  Green,  Eng- 
lish Town  Life  in  the  Fifteenth  Century. 


*21 


322  BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


On  American  history :  brief  works  by  Thorpe^  Fiske.  Larger 
works  by  Schouler^  McMaster.  See  also:  Ford,  Rise  and  Growth  of 
American  Politics.  Johnston,  History  of  American  Politics.  Wilson, 
Congressional  Government. 

On  present  conditions  and  problems  in  western  civilization,  see: 
Dawson,  Germany  and  the  Germans.  Gohre,  Three  Months  in  a  German 
Workshoo.  Spahr,  America's  Working  People.  Woods,  Riis,  and 
Others,  The  Poor  in  Great  Cities.  Bosanquet,  Rich  and  Poor.  Wyck- 
OFF,  The  Workers.  Bryce,  The  American  Commonwealth.  De  Rous- 
siers.  The  Labor  Question  in  Britain.  Sherard,  The  White  Slaves 
of  England.  Bodley,  France.  Demolins,  Anglo  -  Saxon  Superiority. 
Von  Halle,  Trusts,  or  Industrial  Combinations  in  the  United  States. 
Hyndman,  The  Historical  Basis  of  Socialism  in  England.  Dawson, 
German  Socialism  and  Lasalle.  Kirkup,  History  of  Socialism.  Ely, 
Socialism  and  Social  Reform.  Idem,  French  and  German  Socialism. 
Bliss,  Handbook  of  Socialism.  Ely,  Taxation  in  American  States  and 
Cities.  Wells,  Theory  and  Practice  of  Taxation.  Seligman,  Essays 
on  Taxation.  Shearman,  Natural  Taxation.  George,  Progress  and 
Poverty.     Idem,  Social  Problems.     Idem,  The  Land  Question.. 

Leading  periodicals  —  Sociology :  "The  American  Journal  of  Soci- 
ology" (University  of  Chicago  Press).  Socialism:  "The  People"  (New 
York  City).     Single  Tax:   "The  Public"   (Chicago). 


INDEX. 


(Note. —  The  numbers  refer  to  sections  (§§)  — not  to  pages.    In  order 
io  Und  authors  quoted,  look  for  names  in  lists  at  end  of  chapters). 


Ahab,  75. 

America,  settlement  of,  161. 

and  cleavage,  162. 
Anarchists,  23. 
Arabia,   Southern,   17. 
Armada,  Spanish,  158. 
Assyrians,  103,  104. 
Australians,  aboriginal,  11. 

Baalim,  Canaanite,  64. 
Bridge  water,  Duke  of,  164. 

Canaan,  pre-Israelite,  60. 

Israelite  conquest  of,  61. 
Canaanites  and  Israelites,  64. 
Cannibalism,  10,  11. 
Capital,  22. 

contemporary,  165. 

increase  in  Middle  Age,  153. 

increase  in  16th  and  18th  cen- 
turies, 163. 
'^'Capital  and  Land"  — diagram,  172. 
Captivity,  104. 
Church,     Roman     Catholic,     rise 

of,  137. 
Christianity,  rise  of,  126. 

and  cleavage,  131,  137. 
Cities,  growth  of,  33. 
Class  mobility,  146. 
Classic  civ.,  decline,  125. 
^Cleavage,  16,  19,  21,  33,  34,  84. 

and  America,  162. 

beneficent  aspects,  38. 

in  the  Captivity,  105,  106. 


contemporary,  170. 

evil  aspects,  39. 

in  Israel,  62. 

in  western  civ.,  142f. 

vs.  individualism,  23. 
Collectivism  and  individualism,  83. 
Commerce,  33. 

classic,  117,  118. 
Commercial  classes,  oriental,  33. 
Commutation      of     services      for 

money,  154. 
Concentration,  causes  of,  87. 
Conduct  as  cosmically  determined, 

96,  97. 
Cyrus,  112. 

Darwin,  11. 

DeLeon,  Daniel,  177,  178. 

Dreams  in  primitive  thought,  45. 

Education,  oriental,  37. 

Elijah,  76. 

Elohim,  gods,  the  mighty,  59. 

Ethicalism,  origin  of  prophetic,  92. 

Evolution,  social,  1,  2. 

materials  for  study  of,  3. 

and  universal  history,  4. 
Exile,  106-110. 

Fallacy,  post-hoc,  99. 
Famine,  pre-historic,  10. 
Fuegians,  11. 

Future  life,  in  primitive  thought, 
52,  59. 


(323) 


324 


INDEX. 


George,  Henry,  12,  167. 

Gideon,  65. 

Gods,  primitive,  46-49. 

Golden  Age,  Israel's  tradition  of, 

73. 
Government,  evolution  of,  29,  30. 

early  functions,  31. 
Guilds,  152. 

Hovas,  17. 
Hyattsville,  Md.,  174. 

Idols,  origin,  51. 

Industrial  revolution,  164. 

Industry,  oriental,  33. 

India,  Farther,  17. 

Individual  conduct  and  the  social 

problem,  93,  94. 
Individualism  and  collectivism,  83. 
Infanticide,  11. 

reduction  of,  15. 
Israel,  40. 

before  the  Conquest,  41,  42. 

a  Semitic  people,  42. 

early  religion,  53ff. 

Canaanitish,  65. 

Canaanitish  descent  neglected, 
65. 

division  of,  71. 
Israelites  and  Canaanites,  64. 

Jehonadab,  78. 
Jehu,  77. 

Jesus,  message  of,  128f. 
psychology  of,  130. 
Jewish      conditions,      post-Exilic, 

113,  114. 
Jezebel,  75. 
John  of  Gaunt,  158. 
Journal   of   Researches,  Darwin's, 

11. 
Judges,  age  of,  63. 

Kingship,    Israelite,    passes    from 

country  to  city,  65. 
Kinship  ties,  prehistoric,  7. 
Kirkpatrick,  Dr.,  93,  94. 
Kyaochau,  174. 


Labor,  mobility  of  medieval,  145. 
Land,  enclosure  of  American,  166. 

problem,  168ff.,  175. 

speculation  in,  84. 

Malays,  17. 
Manufacture,  33. 

growth  of  in  western  civ.,  150, 
151. 
Masai,  17. 
Material  progress,  prehistoric,  14. 

effects  of,  15,  16. 
Melanesia,  East,  17. 
Messianic  hope,  127. 
Micronesia,  17. 

Middle  Age,  divisions  of,  147. 
Migration,  prehistoric,  8. 
Mobility  of  early  labor,  33. 
Monasticism,  139. 
Moses,  56,  92. 

Nehemiah,  114. 

Old  Testament,  43. 

Patricians  and  plebeians,  121,  122, 
Paul,  135,  136. 
Perspective,  historical,  28. 
Politics,  oriental,  29,  30. 
Polynesia,  17. 
Post-hoc  fallacy,  99. 
Proletariat,  rise  of,  156. 
Prophet,  primary  meaning  of  the 

word,  40. 
Prophets,  the,  40. 
rise  of,  68. 
and  monotheism,  102. 
primarily  social  preachers,  89, 

90. 
individualistic     moralists,    95, 
98. 
Prophetism   passes    from    country 

to  city,  92. 
Puritanism,  160. 

Rechabites,  78. 
Reformation,  157,  158. 


INDEX. 


325 


English,  158. 
religious  aspect,  159. 
Religion,  origin  of,  44ff. 
Religion,  social  cement,  35,  50. 
Religious  phase  of  oriental  civ.,  36. 
Resurrection,    apostolic   preaching 

of,  134. 
Rights,    human,   realized   through 

their  denial,  25. 
Roman  religion,  47. 

Sacrifice,  human,, 58. 
Schwab,  Charles,  178. 
Sinai  Covenant,  56. 
Single  Tax,  172ff. 

effects,  180. 
Socialism,  177. 

vs.   evolutionary   Single    Tax, 
179. 
Society  a  collectivism,  24. 
Steel  trust,  178. 

Tax,  Single,  172ff. 
Taxation,  32,  87. 

Congressional  report  on,  174. 

modern,  169. 
Teraphim,  57. 
Theology,  New,  rise  of,  74. 

first  period  of,  80. 
Third  Estate,  oriental,  33. 

in  classic  civ.,  119. 

in  western  civ.,  148. 


Towns  and  cities,  growth  of,  33. 

in  western  civ.,  149. 
Towns,  chartered,  decay  of,  155. 
Trusts,  178. 

Upper  class,  contraction  of,  76,  86. 

"Vine-   and   Fig-Tree   Tradition," 
73. 

Walker,  F.  A.,  23. 

War,  necessary  and  unnecessary, 

31. 

prehistoric,  9. 
Ward,  Lester  F.,  38. 
Watt,  John,  164. 
Wealth,  modern  concentration  of, 

176. 
Wikliffe,  158. 

Yahweh,  the.  god  of  Israel,  54,  55. 

rise  of,  67. 

called  Baal,  90. 

Kenitic  derivation  of,  56. 

imperialization  of,  101,  102. 
Yahweh-names  in  Israel,  79. 
Yahwism,  partial  neglect  of,  63. 

mixed    with   Canaanite   relig- 
ion, 64,  69. 

and  "righteousness,"  91. 

Zealand,  New,  174. 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  SO  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


ailflQ      ^'^   W'^ 

MkW    ^"^  *^'' 

LD  2 1-95 w- 7, '3 7 

ht 


y 


^C  07573 


2^   f 


M 


naiii  I  i 


